Please stop vandalising my writings in the dog article 

Nothing in my writing here is controvertial and in need of citation. It can all be looked up by the reader on any level. Do you need citations that dogs did not decend thousands of years ago from the wolves that are alive today, as most people believe? Do I need proof that they decended thousands of years ago from the wolves that LIVED thousands of years ago? Why does this need citation? Is this your problem? I am merely pointing out the error that so many, many people make. They hear that dogs decended from wolves, and they look around and see the only wolves left in the world in any number today are the wolves of northern lattitudes...they see the grey wolf of northern Eursaia and the timber wolf of North America, and believe that all dogs decended from them. Humans are a tropical creature that moved into the colder regions. Everywhere man goes, wolf populations dwindle, as anybody knows, and in ancient times, before man, there were wolves all over the world, adapted to their own climates. What part of this needs citation? Obviously, the first dogs to be bred were the ones where the people first lived, which is obviously the warmer climates, and it was THESE wolves that gave rise to most of our dog breeds, not the northern wolves. Now the wolves of the colder regions are the only ones left in number, the wolves in warmer places, where dogs were first bred, are almost all gone. Some northern breeds decended from northern wolves, yes. The spitz breeds and sled dogs, etc. This is all so obviuous, can you tell me what part of this you don't understand, and need citations about? I feel like I am talking to a child. If I tell my child that George Washington was the first president, to I have to give a citation? This stuff doesn't need citation.

You are a vandal, because you, as the only person on earth who doesn't agree with this, erased three whole paragraphs, not once but twice, on the grounds that there were no references, even though much larger tracts of the article are more controvertial and have no citations. You erased every word I wrote, even though all of it is true, none of it is controversial, and this is nothing but pure vandalism.

You need citation that dogs interbreed with coyotes? Why? How can you not already know that? How is this possible? And articles about the Russian jackal-dog hybrid are all over the web. Can you use a search engine? Look up the pre-caudal gland in any veterinary text. Things that are controvertial or new need citations to the new or controvertial sources, but when something become so widely-known that it can be found in every reference work out there, it no longer needs specific citation. For anything I wrote, you can look it up in Britannica. If you read something that you did not know, it doesn't mean the author needs to cite references for you, it just means you need to do your own homework. I am merely pointing out the things that are such a big part of common knowledge, and using them to prove that dogs did not all decend entirely from modern wolves of the colder climate where people didn't even live when dogs were first domesticated. In all my years of veterinary practice, I have probably told 100's of my patients that dogs decended from warm-climate wolves, NOT all of them come from the northern wolves. Now, after all these years, I am confronted by a web vandal who tells me I have to cite freaking references about this. It is purely annoying. 

If you erase my writings again I will report you as a vandal. Really, do NOT do it again.

Morgan Wright