I think Canis makes a good point on the first bullet of the original post in this thread  We can change the language to indicate that the data was collected in New South Wales not worldwide although I dont think that this will change the meaning of the language significantly  NSW seems to be one of the primary places where the breed is established so a slight change to current wording should suffice  The second and third bullets are less clear  Why does it matter that the data is a few years old especially since the dates of the studies are clearly listed in the article  Also if Canis can support claims that RS references in the article contain mistakes heshe should post other RS references explaining these errors  Finally if Canis believes that I have edited incorrectly I would ask that heshe posts diffs showing my bad behavior and explaining exactly what I have done wrong  I have no bias in this matter unlike editors heavily involved in dog breeding and related fields and everything I am doing on this I article is being done to preserve the articles integrity and to improve Wikipedia  Thanks