# Talk:Morgan horse

Why don't we consider including the picture of the UVM statue on this page? (http://www.uvm.edu/morgan/?Page=statue.html)  
It is not a living horse belonging to any individual breeder, and it was created from several revisions by the Morgan Club Board as specifically being the best representation of what JM looked like.  And there are probably public domain photos available, too. T-bonham 08:38, 9 October 2007 (UTC)
I agree on the UVM picture. Also, am I the only one who's slightly offended by the fact that the picture at the top of the page is the modern "show" type? These look nothing like the traditional breed standard. ebolamunkee

We just changed it from a foundation type because the show people were whining about that one and constantly removing it.  It's a no-win here.  We can't use the UVM photo because it's not copyright-free and suitable for use in Wikipedia.  If people would quit whining about the photos that are there and go out and take some GOOD QUALITY photos of both types that are uploaded to Commons with proper licensing so we could use them in the article, I would be the first person to applaud this!  If you check out the Morgan photos in Commons, you will note there aren't a lot of good ones, and most of them are in this article.  Montanabw(talk) 21:58, 5 August 2010 (UTC)
The "young Morgan showing typical breed type" is coarse and untypy, to say the least. This needs to be replaced with a more suitable photograph.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bdevries10 (talk • contribs) 22:55, 28 December 2010 (UTC) 

I would say the yearling is stocky, but it has true foundation Morgan type. "Coarse and untypy" is quite a slam on a fairly attractive young horse.   It is not a modern "Saddlebred" type show Morgan, that is true.  But how about people go out and take some better photos or find legal, copyright-free images on Flickr and upload them to Commons?  We do the best with what we have.  Also,  we get people complaining that the refined animals are nothing but saddlebred wannabees-- worst yet, when we put in a photo of a more refined animal that someone did upload, we got slapped--hard-- because the animal in question was actually a part-Saddlebred that had been banned from the Morgan registry.  (Apparently, ironically, after being named a champion Morgan.  There appears to be some serious dysfunction in the Morgan show world.  But then, that's true of a bunch of other breeds, so not really a surprise)  So really, help solve the problem, we're quite tired of the whining about this issue.  Montanabw(talk) 06:07, 30 December 2010 (UTC)

Removed this image for now, but parking it here in case a need for it arises as the article expands. Nice photo, but only a head shot. 

 Found this in a 1888 newspaper, might be interesting in the article. Ealdgyth | Talk 19:33, 30 November 2007 (UTC)
I had a morgan horse that was 16 hands and have reguarly seen some that are bigger i dont know were they got that morgan only grow to 15.2  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Cj2u44 (talk • contribs) 07:16, 23 November 2008 (UTC) 

The  article states the breed standard as an average range, it's not a statement that many do not grow taller.  Montanabw(talk) 00:19, 25 November 2008 (UTC)

It's actually pretty debatable that Morgans were used as a specific breed for the cavalry remount system during the Indian Wars. Remounts were purchased by regimental boards from any number of horse dealers (the actual remount system didn't come into play until after the 1890s), and preference was typically given to the Thoroughbred when any sort of selection by breed was possible. I've also never seen any good documentation that proves Comanche was any sort of Morgan cross-breed. There are figures available through the records of the remount service that documents the number of Morgans used, and they were very small when compared to Thoroughbreds (which were the majority). There was some experimentation with Arabians and some German warmbloods, but for the most part discussions during the early 1900s appear to have regarded Morgans as more suited for field artillery work than cavalry.Intothatdarkness (talk) 20:57, 5 August 2010 (UTC)
The work of WR Brown around the turn of the century looked at Arabians, Morgans and Thoroughbreds.  As always, what is needed are proper sources.  What's in the article is reasonably verified.  Thoroughbreds had their place, but Morgans and other breeds did as well.  Large horse tend to have poor endurance, Morgans and other compact horses survived the rigors of war much better.  Montanabw(talk) 21:58, 5 August 2010 (UTC)

There are very detailed records for the remount service, and those would be helpful for the actual remount program when it comes to determining the percentage of Morgans that entered into government service. Again, I don't think you can say that they were in major use on the Frontier (the only historical differentiation I'm aware of was between "American" and "California" horses; the latter being more of a mustang cross), and the Comanche comment needs to be sourced. The stuff I've seen indicates that he was a mustang captured in the Oklahoma panhandle region. The Pony Express also didn't exist in the post-Civil War era. I know one cavalry regiment (the First Vermont) was exclusively mounted on Morgans, but on the whole I'm not sure if the available evidence supports some of the statements in the first paragraph of the "breed development" section. Just sayin'.Intothatdarkness (talk) 22:20, 5 August 2010 (UTC)
Well, the article needs work overall, if you can find anything citable, that will be handy.  This article is on our "gotta improve to GA one of these days because it's a significant breed" list, but also the "oh, man THIS one is going to be a lot of work" list.  LOL!  I also know that breed registry sites in general are notorious for exaggerated claims (I can think of five or six right off the bat who claim Bucephalus as one of their own).  I'd say at this point, finding the actual source material is most valuable.  Part of the problem with all breed claims is that a lot of historical horses were not "registered" in the way we think of it today, pedigrees were tracked by word of mouth.  Crossbreds in particular would be hard to track...Comanche, for example, could be part-Morgan, a lot of farmers and ranchers would kick their stallions loose in the Mustang herds to "improve" the stock for the particular uses in the area...everything from Thoroughbreds to Draft horses was put in the mix, very few Mustang herds today are still genetically tracable to the original Spanish colonial stock.  Montanabw(talk) 23:02, 5 August 2010 (UTC)
There is citeable information out there on the Remount Service and its selection of studs for the breeding program. I don't have it on-hand, but it shouldn't be that hard to get to. I'm familiar with the "herd improvement" you're talking about with mustangs, but at the time Comanche was captured (late 1860s if memory serves) that wasn't a common practice (especially in the Indian Territory). I'll do some digging and see if I can come up with good citeable stuff for the article.Intothatdarkness (talk) 14:47, 6 August 2010 (UTC).
Anything you can find would be welcome.  Somewhere I have a copy of "Comanche of the Seventh" which is not a scholarly work, but may have some clues.  Or at least be citable, it's also a bit popularized.  I have to say that there is a lot of romance and nonsense surrounding Comanche, particularly that he was a "wild Mustang", there was even a really cheeseball Disney movie made about him where he was a wild stallion (not a gelding), loved by an Indian boy (except how would Comanche meet a Sioux Indian boy in Oklahoma?), who was the ONLY human survivor on both sides (um, no, the Indians did quite well, actually), and the pair miraculously reunited on the battlefield at the end... you get the drift.. (going off to retch now, too much saccharine...!)  Montanabw(talk) 18:36, 6 August 2010 (UTC)
Follow up: I did a very cursory search and did find this, which is not an ideal source, but at least it's a source for now on the Morgan/Mustang thing.  I added it to the stuff already in Comanche (horse).  Nothing on an Oklahoma birthplace, but maybe there is something out there.  From the photos, he clearly has some good breeding in there somewhere, he could be part Morgan. He could also be something else, even some TB breeding isn't impossible, though his level of endurance had to come from somewhere other than TB lines, bless 'em.  Montanabw(talk) 19:00, 6 August 2010 (UTC)

Want to note some newer images on commons that may be suitable here, though with the recent concern raised that non-Morgans are being posted as Morgans, want to see if any objections exist for the following: File:Morgan1.jpg(<-really like this one),  File:Morgan2.jpg, File:MorganBlaze.jpg(<-that one looks like a professional shot), File:BayMorganHead1.jpg, File:Morgan parked out.jpg(<- is this horse too long and poorly conformed to use? Also possibly a part-Saddlebred?)  Montanabw(talk) 04:41, 11 October 2010 (UTC)

I'd like to bring it to the notice of editors on this page that a new contributor from ip address 98.135.8.81 has apparently complained about one of the images that was used in this article as being a copyright violation. As of the current version, the image - which has been nominated for a speedy deleted as a suspected copy vio - is not included in the article. I'd request contributing editors to not include the image in question till the time the CSD is processed. The image has perchance been copied directly from here Thanks   Wifione    ....... Leave a message 14:52, 11 October 2010 (UTC)
I already took care of this yesterday.  I also was the person who put on the speedy delete tag.  I can't verify for certain that the horse in question is the controversial half-Saddlebred, but I inquired at user 98's talk page if they can find another instance of its use. I do, however, agree that its composition and quality strongly suggests its a professional image, and the same image on Flickr has already been deleted, so I suspect that we do have a copyvio.  I also left a message above for those who care to review the other images at Commons to see if any more raise these concerns.  As for the rest, we would be glad to discuss any other concerns about the accuracy and sourcing of this article, however, I DO want to caution user 98 (and anyone else) not to delete footnoted, sourced material without discussion.   Montanabw(talk) 01:26, 12 October 2010 (UTC)

Since the Pony Express ended during the Civil War, it certainly isn't likely that Morgans were used by them in the post-CW period. I'm taking that out.Intothatdarkness (talk) 15:10, 14 February 2012 (UTC)

Yeah, and aside from the historical inaccuracy, there were Morgan crosses all over the west, but no one breed, most of the Pony Express horses were some sort of grade or Mustang tough-as-crap little things that could be pretty much run to death.  Montanabw(talk) 17:12, 14 February 2012 (UTC)
I also tweaked the cavalry section to say "may" as opposed to "were used." Without a good citation I'm very hesitant to say that they were used as remounts. Obviously the possibility is there, especially for the crosses you mentioned, but it's not a certainty in most cases. Officers' mounts would be an exception, as many purchased their own.Intothatdarkness (talk) 18:10, 14 February 2012 (UTC)
Go for it.  This whole article needs a lot of work to ever get to GA, the first step is separating the promotional material and myths from the actual verifiable stuff. Anything you do helps.  (Breed registries are frustrating.  The can be top authorities on one thing and absolute unsourced PR machines on other things).  Montanabw(talk) 03:43, 16 February 2012 (UTC)

Setting this area up for comments on the article to get it to GA. Montanabw(talk) 19:16, 12 June 2012 (UTC)

All the pretty pictures on Commons.  Can we check the copyright status of the ones in the gallery to verify they are OK even by FA standards?  (No sense putting in something only to be thrown out). Montanabw(talk) 20:38, 12 June 2012 (UTC)

Actually, all of these images look good, copyright wise. Even the watermarked image was properly uploaded from Flickr, and double checked WRT copyright status. Dang, got a two-fer on this one - good pictures, and properly licensed :) Dana boomer (talk) 23:23, 12 June 2012 (UTC)
I've added in the Western image for now, since the article has expanded enough to handle another image. Dana boomer (talk) 01:04, 13 June 2012 (UTC)
And have added in one of the saddleseat images, after additional expansion. Dana boomer (talk) 02:18, 14 June 2012 (UTC)
Removed the watermarked one: "Free images should not be watermarked, distorted, have any credits or titles in the image itself or anything else that would hamper their free use, unless, of course, the image is intended to demonstrate watermarking, distortion, titles, etc. and is used in the related article. Exceptions may be made for historic images when the credit or title forms an integral part of the composition. Historical images in the public domain sometimes are out of focus, display dye dropouts, dust or scratches or evidence of the printing process used."Apophenic (talk) 16:54, 19 September 2018 (UTC)

Comanche
We may want to take a stab at this claim, too. Here's some proposed wording with sources:
While Morgan enthusiasts have stated that Comanche (horse) was either a Morgan or a Mustang/Morgan mix, there is no contemporary evidence to support this statement. The Army purchased their remounts during this period from a variety of sources and had no central breeding program or facility. Most early accounts state that Comanche was either of "mustang lineage"source or a mix of "American" and "Spanish" blood source. The website of the Museum of Natural History at the University of Kansas (which has the stuffed body of Comanche on display) makes no statement as to his breed source. All sources agree that he originated in the Oklahoma or Texas area, making his mustang background more likely.
Historical accuracy is important for an article like this. We should try to present as accurate a picture as possible, even if it means modifying a cherished (although possibly incorrect) claim. Intothatdarkness (talk) 20:55, 12 June 2012 (UTC)

Historical accuracy is definitely important. The above looks good, but we'll need sources for the first two sentences. Thanks for taking this on. Dana boomer (talk) 23:23, 12 June 2012 (UTC)
Here's a source for the claim he was Morgan...although if you could get one article (preferably by a noted equine historian, or in a big-name equine magazine) that gives all of the info at once, it would be awesome. Dana boomer (talk) 23:26, 12 June 2012 (UTC)
That one comes from the Morgan Horse Association. I did find an online listing for a mag called Canter that used the unknown breeding line. Catch is, I'm not primarily an equine specialist. Military history is more my line, and I've got a lot of background with the Frontier Army. I can get a source for the remount practices easily enough (in fact, the source that lists Comanche as American/Spanish blood has copies of letters sent by the officer in charge of the purchasing detail, but I can get print sources from Reedstrom and Utley...the former's a Seventh Cavalry guy and the latter is one of the major authors dealing with the Frontier Army). Intothatdarkness (talk) 13:33, 13 June 2012 (UTC)
And this would not be the first time Okie state cites dubious, unverifiable info they pulled from a breed promotion site.  I think that remount data is our best source here.  Could we say something like this:? Montanabw(talk) 19:38, 13 June 2012 (UTC)
While Morgan enthusiasts have stated that Comanche (horse) was either a Morgan or a Mustang/Morgan mix,[1] records of the U.S. Army and other early sources do not support this. Most accounts state that Comanche was either of "Mustang lineage"source or a mix of "American" and "Spanish" blood source. The University of Kansas Natural History Museum, which has the stuffed body of Comanche on display, makes no statement as to his breed source. All sources agree that he originated in the Oklahoma or Texas area, making his Mustang background more likely.

Looks fine to me. I can get sources for the way remounts were acquired at this time if they're needed, though. Just sayin'... But we may be able to avoid that. Intothatdarkness (talk) 19:47, 13 June 2012 (UTC)
OK, I've added in the above. Intothatdarkness, if you have any sources for Morgans being used as remounts in general, I would love to have the information. Do you have anything that even mentions them being used as remounts?
They didn't start tracking studs for remount purposes until the turn of the century, and the serious programs all began after World War I. All the discussion I've seen from the Indian Wars period (old Cavalry Journal articles mostly) referred to "breeds" as "American" or "California" horses. The only exception to this was the Second Cavalry before the Civil War (which later became the Fifth Cavalry). Jefferson Davis went to great lengths with that regiment, and had it mounted on horses from Kentucky. Once the Remount Service was established, they tracked stallion breeds and such very closely. But even then, Morgans were a distinct minority (single digit numbers in the entire system, as opposed to Thoroughbreds who were the vast majority). As I mentioned before, the testing the Army did indicated that for their purposes Morgans were better suited to the Field Artillery. Intothatdarkness (talk) 13:33, 14 June 2012 (UTC)
Given the leaning toward online sources, here's one that gives a general overview of the remount service's history - Cederwald, Major A.A. "The Remount Service Past and Present." The Quartermaster Review, Nov-Dec 1928. Accessed at http://www.qmfound.com/remount_service.htm. Intothatdarkness (talk) 18:06, 14 June 2012 (UTC)
Can we maybe toss in a small blurb about this, seeing as how we have a real prevalent set of tall tales all over the internet on this topic?  In particular, can we verify or debunk this source? Montanabw(talk) 18:35, 14 June 2012 (UTC)
Notice that they don't give a date for the remount service piece? That's how they get away with it. That program was available, but not until the 1920s when the service was established. The article I linked above has some info on that. I've never seen any information about Morgans being used with Native American programs, but I suppose that at least might be possible. I really wish the Quartermaster Review existed somewhere online. It had complete breed breakdowns for the Remount Service, and Morgans were a single-digit minority. Maybe the folks at the Fort Robinson Museum in Nebraska could help. Oh, and this made me chuckle. From the site you linked..."They were so popular that many less-than-honest folks were claiming Morgan ancestors for horses that had no Morgan blood in their ancestry. Complaints appeared in the press about the problem to no avail." Intothatdarkness (talk) 18:56, 14 June 2012 (UTC)
Sources don't have to be online, and if we go as far as FAC, solid book sources are often preferable, especially over some of the iffy websites that often pop up with regards to various breed mythologies. If you have book sources that detail this information, please feel free to either drop the information here or pop it into the article yourself. Information has to be verifiable - no one ever said it has to be easily verifiable! (Which is how I can get away with using books that can only be found in half a dozen libraries worldwide for some of the rarer breeds!) Dana boomer (talk) 19:21, 14 June 2012 (UTC)
Granted it's still in draft form, but over here I've parked some information on how the system worked after the Civil War. It was a mix of contracts with dealers and board purchases, depending mostly on need. I've also got a query out for some of the stuff from the Quartermaster Review dealing with the stud program. Intothatdarkness (talk) 20:20, 15 June 2012 (UTC)
By the way, can you verify about Stonewall Jackson's horse Little Sorrel being a Morgan?  Non-horse sources (news articles, Googled) seem to be pretty unanimous that he was.  Montanabw(talk) 20:43, 13 June 2012 (UTC)
I can try. Not sure what's out there about that one, though. By most period accounts he was a stubby little thing (the horse, not Jackson) and not considered impressive except for his stamina. I think he's also stuffed somewhere. Intothatdarkness (talk) 21:21, 13 June 2012 (UTC)
Here's a photo of him from VMI. Kinda ragged looking. Little Sorrel This claims he was born in Connecticut, but has no sourcing links and then repeats the Morgan claim. I'll do some more digging. Intothatdarkness (talk) 21:26, 13 June 2012 (UTC)
As is currently in the article, I found sources for both Morgan and Saddlebred claims (at that point, the saddlebred was half Morgan anyway, so I'm not sure there's much difference). Not sure we can just ignore the Saddlebred claims, unless we find a really solid source debunking them. Dana boomer (talk) 02:18, 14 June 2012 (UTC)
Works for me.  His size strongly suggests mostly Morgan, compare to Lee's [{Traveller (horse)]], who I think was more of a saddlebred type.  Montanabw(talk) 18:27, 14 June 2012 (UTC)

Also can't find a source for these two statements (in History section):

Racking horses were influenced by the Morgan horse.
Nearly 90% of Saddlebred horses today have Morgan blood.
Does anyone else have sources that cover these? Dana boomer (talk) 23:58, 12 June 2012 (UTC)

OK, done for the night again. Feel free to have at it. I probably won't get around to more work until tomorrow evening. Still not completely done with my sources... Dana boomer (talk) 01:04, 13 June 2012 (UTC)
I'd toss those unsourced statements.  My guess is that I was probably the one who added them from the Morgan registry site as it was about five years ago, and if you can't verify them, no skin off my nose if tossed.  Montanabw(talk) 19:38, 13 June 2012 (UTC)
OK, tossed. If anyone comes across a source for the info, it can go back in. Dana boomer (talk) 02:18, 14 June 2012 (UTC)

A couple of things:

I know that there are gaited Morgans (not very many now, because they've been selectively bred to trot, but there are a few left and some breeders are trying to preserve them), but I can't find any solid sources for this info. Anyone have anything?
Has anyone stumbled across any health problems in the breed? I found a mention of non-problematic cataracts being found frequently in Morgans - is this important enough to add in?
Thoughts? Dana boomer (talk) 00:39, 15 June 2012 (UTC)

I have run across the gaited Morgan stuff too.  I suggest seeing if we can find an organization out there promoting them and just mention it along with the Morgan ponies. Montanabw(talk) 20:42, 15 June 2012 (UTC) ::Yep to genetic diseases! They definitely can have type 1 PSSM see here, also, there are frame overo Morgans, so the possibility of lethal white syndrome exists, but I wouldn't add that unless we have unimpeachable sources for one actually being produced, as that is a hot, hot, hot potato.  We also have silver dapple gene in Morgans, which, as you know from the Rocky Mountain horse article, is linked to blindness (the "non-problematic cataracts?"  Hmmm).  One sort-of source mentioning this is http://www.horsetalk.co.nz/breeding/breedingforcolour-128.shtml.  No clue if Morgans are now plagued with the same lordosis problem seen in Saddlebreds, technically they shouldn't be, with the stud book closed, but as noted above in the talk about that photo that was tossed and the treat scandal of a part SB getting named nat'l champion Morgan, I suspect a few modern SBs probably did get snuck in. Montanabw(talk) 20:42, 15 June 2012 (UTC)
Other thoughts:  I really distrust the Okie state site any more, their claim of Morgans in Quarter horse bloodlines is dubious, I was looking for other verification and there's not much (this book says they shipped some to the King Ranch) the influence of Morgans IS probably there (look at QH butts!), but both breeds having muscular hindquarters may simply reflect the influence of older Spanish horses -- The best quality Mustangs and old foundation Morgans look a lot alike.  (I remember once asking if someone's adopted Pryor Mountain Mustang was a Morgan, in fact!!). Now what is really weird is that Hendricks, for a change, has a lot of personal comment on the Morgan, see pp 290 on probably needing verification backup, but it's a better than usual entry - and she doesn't make the "ancestor of the Quarter Horse" claim.  On the other hand, there is ample support for the stallion that influenced the Hackney.  I think we could expand on the Morgan influence on the Standardbred, I ran across some references to Dan Patch having a lot of Morgan blood.  Also, Allen F-1 aka Black Allen was at least part Morgan and a foundation sire of the TWH.  We also can connect them to the Camarillo White Horse, the Curly horse and of course, the Morab.  (And I still would like to see the influences on other breeds separated from the main history chronology, somehow)   Montanabw(talk) 20:42, 15 June 2012 (UTC)
Man...that linked Morgan stuff sure fails the historical sniff test. "Old-timers remember" is right up there with "now this is no BS" when it comes to war stories. Undid some offbeat vandalism when I went to the Kingsville page just to see if it had a date when the railroad might have arrived there, though. But if Kingsville was formed in 1904, that does restrict the influence of the Morgan on the typical cow pony IF that "rail car load of mares" actually went to Kingsville. Intothatdarkness (talk) 21:01, 15 June 2012 (UTC)
I dropped a line to Ealdgyth, who is a RL expert on Quarter Horse bloodlines (see her talk) she says there is some Morgan influence, though limited, and will find something with adequate specificity.  I asked her to pop the results over here. Montanabw(talk) 21:13, 15 June 2012 (UTC)

Do you think these will pass WP:RS?  They are good for the bloodlines and history.

http://sportmorgan.com/Morgan%20breed%20and%20families.html
http://www.brunkmuseum.com/history.htm
Thoughts?  Montanabw(talk) 01:53, 28 June 2012 (UTC)

First one probably not, second one maybe. Of the refs added in earlier, the Silver Dapple Morgan Project (ref #9), Morgan Colors (ref #10), and Pets Place (#4) are all not so great. The first two especially, since the information as I had it in there was all referenced to high-quality journals/universities, which were replaced/supplemented by these, which would never pass FAC and would be quite iffy at GAN. Dana boomer (talk) 02:10, 28 June 2012 (UTC)
Didn't mean to screw up the good sources, in the c/e, they got split up, mea culpa.  I agree on Pets place, I'd like to find better sources for the stuff that only that is linked to (I looked at their Arabian page, which completely sucks).  Problem is, I'm gun shy from so many edit wars, some days I just don't know which end is up.  Perfect source, but not comprehensive; comprehensive but imperfect sourcing.  I'd like to see a comprehensive article, the problem is finding the best sources.  (I knew where to look for appies, not so knowledgable on where the bodies are buried for Morgans) The sporthorse site was quite good for expanding on the bloodline group stuff.  I'd sure like to use the info, somehow.  The registry site (like all breed registries, actually)  is so CYA about things for fear of offending anyone, it's good to get the straight scoop from somewhere! What do you think? I'm open to ideas. ????Montanabw(talk) 22:13, 28 June 2012 (UTC)
Note, I tossed one pet place item, probably not needed, though entertaining (if we find RS on horse pulling competition, we can re-add).  The other time it's cited is for the proposition that Morgans are intelligent, curious and have a good disposition; all of which are true (After having two in my lesson horse string back in the day, I think of them as the Jack Russell Terriers of the horse world - opposable thumbs and they'd take over the planet.  Another owned by an acquaintance of mine gives goats a run for their money for pulling assorted pranks).  If we can get a better source on that, I'm game.  But disposition claims from breed registries are always a little dubious, I mean, who will claim their horses DON'T have a good disposition, eh?  Montanabw(talk) 22:40, 28 June 2012 (UTC)
OK, finally having gotten back around to this... I've replaced the Pet Place and Morgan Colors refs. I left the Silver Dapple ref because, on taking another look, the website is written by a woman who has been published in a couple of other magazines. This should make it good to go, at least for GA status. At this point, I think the article is broad, if not necessarily comprehensive, so are you OK with me tossing it up for GAN? In the meantime, while waiting for a review, we can ping Ealdgyth again to try to get more in-depth stuff/better sources on the Morgan influence on Quarter Horses, plus there are a couple of other more minor breeds that they influenced. By the time all of that information goes in there, it may be enough to split out into another section, although I'm leery of having a bunch of one-paragraph sections all stacked on top of each other... Dana boomer (talk) 17:09, 24 October 2012 (UTC)
If you think it will pass GA as is, you have more GAs than I, so go for it.  Refs replaced seem to verify the data, so good finds all around. Petplace had to go, I know, but I wish we could find a source that notes that they are sort of the pranksters of the horse world with a huge sense of humor (for a horse).  Oh well.  In terms of comprehensive, what do you think we need to focus on expanding?  I always enjoy doing the history bit, and would like to see what Intothatdarkness can find on army remount stuff. I think there's a fair bit of Civil War history material we could examine, but we will have to be careful to verify horses that actually can be "proven" to be Morgans, versus the far greater number claimed to be part-Morgan or something (Morgan Horse Assn probably will not be reliable on that point, though may point us to horses to look at...).  Influence on Saddlebreds and Standardbreds will be where we should also look for solid source material.  Montanabw(talk) 21:22, 25 October 2012 (UTC)
I've hit pretty much all I can with the Remount stuff without some archives time. The one detailed list I consulted and noted here showed the majority of the studs were Thoroughbreds, and every bit of documentation I've seen continues that trend. The Civil War is likewise problematic, since any initial horse issue done by states would have been pretty rapidly replaced by the quartermaster's remounts (which you would have great difficulty verifying by breed in any meaningful sense). Same thing with the Frontier Army. Literature from that period never really goes beyond the "American" and "California" horse distinction, with the California being smaller (likely some sort of mustang cross). Americans were also referred to as Kentucky or Tennessee horses. Intothatdarkness 21:41, 25 October 2012 (UTC)

This review is transcluded from Talk:Morgan horse/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.
Reviewer: Casliber (talk · contribs) 10:30, 11 November 2012 (UTC)
Ok, having a look now - will jot queries below. Casliber (talk · contribs) 10:30, 11 November 2012 (UTC)

I find the first sentence a little wooden. If I were aiming for FAC, I might try something like.."Tracing back from the 1790s horse Figure, The Morgan is one of the earliest horse breeds developed in the United States." or something like this (obviously that needs rejigging of the second sentence too...).
I'll fiddle with it a wee bit; my usual approach is to fix the body of the article before redoing the lead; so once we have everything else tweaked, let us know if we need more work on the lead.  -- MTBW
During the early days of their history, the Morgan was used extensively for harness racing, as well as for pulling coaches, as they were known for their speed and endurance in harness.  - align the singular/plural...
Tweaked.  Better now?  --MTBW
Daniel C. Lindley, a native of Middlebury, Vermont, compiled and published a book of Morgan breeding stallions published in 1857 - err, probably don't need two "published" in there....
Tweaked.  Better now?  --MTBW
...as well as an "open competition" program run by the AMHA .... - why the quote marks?
"open competition" has a lot of different meanings in the horse world, so we are indicating it's a term of art when used in this sense by the AMHA. ---  MTBW
ok Casliber (talk · contribs) 19:55, 15 November 2012 (UTC)
gentleness - "gentle nature" methinks. bit too ambitious...
Tweaked.  Better now?  --MTBW
Otherwise looking good....Casliber (talk · contribs) 10:46, 11 November 2012 (UTC)
1. Well written?:

Prose quality: 
Manual of Style compliance: 
2. Factually accurate and verifiable?:

References to sources: 
Citations to reliable sources, where required: 
No original research: 
3. Broad in coverage?:

Major aspects: 
Focused: 
4. Reflects a neutral point of view?:

Fair representation without bias: 
5. Reasonably stable?

No edit wars, etc. (Vandalism does not count against GA): 
6. Illustrated by images, when possible and appropriate?:

Images are copyright tagged, and non-free images have fair use rationales: 
Images are provided where possible and appropriate, with suitable captions: 

Overall: 

Pass or Fail:  - that first sentence I'm still not hugely in love with, but it's not enough to stop GA status. Looks fine otherwise. Casliber (talk · contribs) 19:57, 15 November 2012 (UTC)
Awesome, thanks Cas! Dana boomer (talk) 21:07, 15 November 2012 (UTC)
Yes, thanks Cas.  I hear you about the lede, I suspect we'll have to pep it up a lot before trying for FA, but that might be awhile, so if you want to take of your reviewer hat and play with it a bit yourself, we would be glad to have you stay around!  Montanabw(talk) 22:14, 15 November 2012 (UTC)

I have added a clarification tag to "clean-cut head" because I do not understand what this means.  In several places, this article uses words or phrases that are too technical for the average reader and do not attempt to explain these or direct the reader to an article where they are explained. There is no point in removing a clarification tag saying "that is what it says in the breed standards" because the standards simply use the same inaccessible language.  In this case, the phrase "clean-cut head" is not mentioned in the breed standards and is possibly OR. Would editors knowleadgeable in "horse speak" please edit this article and use language that us more accessible.__DrChrissy (talk) 16:44, 23 January 2015 (UTC)

We also must avoid WP:SYNTH and WP:COPYVIO. Would just saying "refined" or "expressive" work better?  If not, I'm open to a way to succinctly state this in our own words without too-closely paraphrasing.  Here's what the source says in detail about the head of the Morgan horse: here:" The Morgan is easily recognized by his ... distinctive head with expressive eyes." (p. 4)  "The head should be expressive with a broad forehead; large, prominent eyes; straight or slightly dished short face; firm, fine lips; large nostrils; and well-rounded jowls. The ears should be short and shapely, set rather wide apart, and carried alertly. Mares may have a slightly longer ear." (pp.5,8). "HEAD: The typical Morgan head is one of the most distinguishing characteristics of the breed. Any of the below mentioned faults seriously detracts from it and should be penalized accordingly. 1. Course [sic] or plain head 2. Long and coarse ears  3. Lop ears 4.4. Ears set too far forward 5. Pig eyes 6. Parrot mouth 7. Coarse muzzle 8. Narrow, long head 9. Roman nose, 10.Small nostrils 11.Broken wind–respiratory distress 12.Stallions lacking masculinity 13. Mares lacking femininity" (p. 12) .  Obviously, we can't put ALL of that in here, not even a tenth of it, we must summarize.  Montanabw(talk) 21:55, 23 January 2015 (UTC)
Now, another alternative would be to create an entry for "breedy" or "clean-cut" or "refined" or something in the Glossary of equestrian terms.  We also need to do a lot more work on the currently weak equine conformation article.  Montanabw(talk) 21:55, 23 January 2015 (UTC)
I also do ask that you take a quick look at technical language.  I'm all for wikilinking terms and such to aid understanding, but there comes a point where people just have to learn the lingo.  I've been doing Good Article reviews of [{The Boat Race]] articles and the rowing terminology, combined with British English, threw me several times.  But I'm getting there, and I'm not asking the lead editor to say things like "the right-hand (starboard) side of the boat." Montanabw(talk) 21:55, 23 January 2015 (UTC)
WOW!  I think we might have got there!  You mentioned the Glossary of equestrian terms...I did not know this existed!  I would be quite happy to see links to this page for terms like "expressive head", "clean-cut head", etc.  I appreciate some terms are not explained yet (ongoing project), but at least editors like myself can improve horse-related articles by linking to this.__DrChrissy (talk) 00:39, 24 January 2015 (UTC)
We also have a LOT of work to do on equine conformation, which would be even more appropriate.  One editor did a nice spin-off, Limbs of the horse. But yeah, we're working on it.  Montanabw(talk) 05:07, 25 January 2015 (UTC)

Breed type and specifications for breeding and retention of the Morgan Horse existed during the time that US Government Horse Farm existed, up until Congress at the request of private breeders dispersed the herd among the land-grant colleges and private parties, leaving UVM and some few others the task of perpetuating the horse without government support. Perhaps fifteen years ago Steve Davis, at that time Director of UVM Morgan Horse Farm, told us that UVM had (and may still have) a copy of those government breed-type specifications. He may have sent me us copy but if so we do not now have it.
Also, find teh moments where specifications changed. When Harry Sebring took over the AMHA "Judging Standards" revisions, language for breed type radically changed. Any reasonable analysis of this set of changes, which the proponents admitted to desiring and enacted over several years, will show an attempt to lead the breed toward characteristics previously associated with Saddlebred and Hackney. Before that, breed type language was primarily the same for a very long time:  deep heart girth, straight legs, 14.3-15.3 HH, medium neck and throat latch, four pasterns the same length: these standards were more similar to any internationally recognizable athletic conformation than current Judging standards. For many years, the National Park Service named the Morgan it's #1 horse of choice, and specifications or ationale of that tradition may prove helpful.  Because of the campaign openly begun in the 90's by certain breeders and trainers to make the Morgan Horse more like the American Saddlebred and Hackney, an undertaking such as this must find incontrovertible historical documents or be shouted down by partisams, or fail to find descriptions of what the breed originally was, and why it was valued, then and now.
One suggestion would be to find such documents -- those pertaining to the original breed standards of the USG Horse Farm, and after: under Donald Balch's academic and stringent leadership of the UVM Morgan Horse Farm breed perpetuation program -- and quote them. The current problems between those in favor of hybrid Morgan Horses (new type) and those in favor of classic "old type" horses, will sort itself out but this article cannot succeed if it is subject to passing fancies or trainers'manipulation of perceptions for financial gain.
Since we no longer actively breed Morgan Horses, we have no dog in this fight, but have literally thousands of photos of Morgans, living and dead, with clear parentage and attribution adequate for publication. Because of these, we may be able to help you. We will provide images of Morgans doing reining, Western Pleasure, Western Dressage, hunter-please, English Pleasure or Park, and allow their use for this purpose of the WP FACTUAL Morgan Horse article (if and where those images are under our control, as public domain or preferably with permission of /accreditation to the photographers). If someone will contact us here or at ccmorris@capecod.net for photos you can use, we'll provide those. 
We will also point people to various articles, such as one by Ben Qua in TMH in 2003-4, where he admits to being a participant and eye-witness to the meeting in which the Morgan Horse Club PURPOSELY took a decision to change the breed toward a more saddlebred-type horse. Of course, when we joined the breed in the 1990s, the 'said-to-be" epoch of the Morgan was ending, as blood-testing became the rule and some horses were slaughtered rather than be found to be dopplegangers. Without attacking anyone, quotes can be found and used that show that, although the breed has bobbled during the 1990s and 2010s and still today struggles to reabsorb these hybrid Morgans, a Morgan horse has characteristics that define it and show its its breed-type. Despite the rich owner and trainer cliques, the Morgan Horse's special qualities remain in tact AND RESURGE rapidly when/if breeding to type resumes. We fully expect the Morgan to absorb the conformational flaws and  that came with this injudicious outcrossing, and reassert its basic hardy and valuable nature. When Justin Morgan, or "Figure"  the horse was alive, he couldn't breed to any Morgans:  there were none. He was bred to anyone who paid the stud fee. Battell's first Morgan Horse register required a percentage of 30% or more Justin Morgan blood. AMHA has one of those original books (of which only fourteen purportedly survive), because we gave it to them. That foundation stallion, and his ability to produce a smarter, stronger, more versatile horse, is alive today in Morgan Horses everywhere, and eventually today's concerned breed lovers will be proud of their horse as he was in history, as he is today, and as he will be tomorrow.  Good luck, guys.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.60.222.200 (talk) 19:36, 24 July 2016 (UTC) 

24.60.222.200, a lot of this can't be included unless you have published sources like books or magazines verifying it. Do you have those, like older breed magazines? If not, it's original research, which is prohibited. I agree that Morgans have undergone a large change, but so have a lot of other breeds. To some extent, the riding demographics changed and now people are interested more in trail riding and natural horsemanship. There's also the Warmblood craze in the hunter jumper world, which has upped the demand for horses from other countries and knocked the breeding rates for several American breeds, which used to be ridden in those disciplines, way down.
If you can upload new and better pictures with a free license, please do so. We can only use free pictures, and I agree that most of these are not that good. Nobody on the horse project owns a Morgan, and so we don't have a surefire source for new pictures. White Arabian Filly Neigh 21:48, 24 July 2016 (UTC)
Add: this article isn't written by any Morgan owners or trainers that I know of. Actually, I know what kinds of horses most of us here on the horse project have and what we do with them, and we don't have any Morgans or Morgan people. Wikipedia articles are based on what is written in third-party sources. White Arabian Filly Neigh 21:53, 24 July 2016 (UTC)
White Arabian Filly comment:  I have no idea how to use Wikipedia, so I'll figure out how to upload photos, and where you'd like the photos uploaded (hints would be nice) and their attributions and copyright holders; I'll even request permission for uses if the photos aren't taken by us and ask other photographers under what conditions they'll allow use. As for the documents I referenced, those are extant documents published the breed Journal, The Morgan horse Magazine; some from UVM's historical records.I believe I can get those for you. The photo to my eye that is most offensive photo is of the show horse who's standing ankles together -- demonstrating that it is base narrow, a dangerous conformation flaw in any breed. I'll find a similar photo to substitute; as for other photos, as I say, we have thousands, of Morgans of all breeding and ages.  I'd rather give a selection of photos with acceptable breed type and no obvious conformational flaws, and let you choose what you like.  It will take me some time to figure out where to upload, and how many I can upload. And I will take on the job finding documents or sourcing documents that meet your criteria. I believe the documents I referenced can all be acquired by me for forwarding to you with a bit of effort on my part. Where I have printed documents from primary or secondary sources such as The Morgan Horse Magazine (breed journal), I'll cite and upload quotes. However, don't expect these very soon. Without further guidance, I'll upload to this page or to some page where you want photos to choose from. I am hoping not to join any group, but simply provide some useful information.  if you feel that because we once owned Morgans, we are inappropriate helpers, let me know and I'll leave you to it.

You can upload photos to  Commons is the sister site of Wikipedia. There's a gallery there specifically for Morgan horses, search for 'Category:Morgan Horse'. Any freely licensed picture is fine to upload, but for copyrighred pictures, the photographer will have to send an email to the site giving permission to use the file.
Any magazines or publications can be cited by using the Template:Cite news or Template:Cite magazine article, which gives you parameters to fill in. It's not an issue that you own Morgans, unless you try to use Wikipedia to promote them, which you don't seem to be doing. (We do sometimes have problems with people who try to advertise their stable, farm, trainer, etc.) White Arabian Filly Neigh 20:53, 25 July 2016 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Morgan horse. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120913030104/http://www.morganhorse.com/registry/registry_history/ to http://www.morganhorse.com/registry/registry_history/
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 09:20, 12 May 2017 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Morgan horse. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100926054242/http://www.morganhorse.com/home/faqs/ to http://www.morganhorse.com/home/faqs/
Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070805010908/http://www.bulldancers.com/morganpony/ to http://www.bulldancers.com/morganpony/
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 17:09, 5 February 2018 (UTC)

Morab is a non-notable crossbreed    ▶ I am Grorp ◀  02:26, 11 November 2023 (UTC)

Oppose. Every breed's a crossbred if you go back far enough. And it's notable. The hard part is not finding coverage at all, but sorting out the chaff. Iamnotabunny (talk) 21:58, 14 February 2024 (UTC)
Closing, given the uncontested objection and no support with discussion stale for many months. Klbrain (talk) 07:08, 30 June 2024 (UTC)