Talk:Dalmatian dog/Archive 1

message: However, I took out this sentence: "It is also sometimes, believed to erroneously, named Smaller Danish Dog." - as it does not on the face of it seem to make sense. What does it mean? Can we sort it out and put it back? --Nevilley 23:37, 29 May 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: I have no idea and couldn't figure it out but left it there hoping that someone else might know what it meant. I'm guessing that something somewhere (no idea in or out of wikip) refers to it as a "smaller danish dog" and whoever added this was pointing out that this is incorrect.  Don't know whether it's necessary unless it's an authoritative source, but I don't know and didn't check history to figure out who added this. Elf | Talk 20:04, 1 Jun 2004 (UTC)

text: I wrote that to mean "Dalmatian is also sometimes called "Smaller Danish Dog", but some people believe that name is erroneous" (since it also applies to some bulldogs, it seems). OED says "Dalmatian dog, the spotted coach-dog, sometimes called ‘smaller Danish dog’. Also Dalmatian pointer, etc."  --Menchi 22:10, 1 Jun 2004 (UTC)

text: I seem to remember it was due to the naming of the Great Dane, that the seeming similarity in coloring of the Harlequin Great Dane and Dalmatians made people call one the "Greater Dane Dog" and the other the "Smaller Dane Dog" Elipongo 08:27, 22 October 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Smaller Danish Dog

message: So, I am a Dalmatian too... ehm... and I'm not a dog. :) Dalmatians are also the inhabitants of Dalmatia, so I would like to move this page to "Dalmatian (dog)" and make "Dalmatian" a disambig page which would link to Dalmatia (for the people). If there are no objections in the next few days I'd like to proceed with that change. --Arny 20:58, 1 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Hey, we Dalmatians (khm, people) sure did a fine job breeding such nice dogs for others to enjoy, at least we deserve a disambig entry ;) It seems there shouldn't be any serious objections so here is my plan: I'll move this to "Dalmatian (dog)", make "Dalmatian" disambig page for the dog and "Dalmatia", then correct the redirect "Dalmation" to point directly to the dog, and then correct links from the pages concerning dog breeds. The other links could be left as they are since they'd just be pointing to the disambig page (and I've seen many such cases on WP), or I might just engage in a manual "Search and destroy" campaign and hunt other links. What do you think? Greetings, fellow dog lovers from the sworn wikignome Arny 02:25, 2 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Move this to Disambig page? 

message: Much of what's on this page is identical to that on http://www.dogbreedinfo.com/dalmatian.htm. That site states "The Material contained herein may not be reproduced without 
the prior written approval of the author. © 1998-2006 All Rights Reserved." 198.49.180.40 17:51, 3 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Have to say, I can't see any relation (even when looking at versions from May 2006). Both articles mention many of the same points, but then they are discussing the same subject. -- Solipsist 08:02, 12 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Copyright problem! 

message: The article states that dalmations are "unique" in being able to smile.  Does anyone have a reference to prove this is true?  I have seen several dogs from other breeds do this as well, so I think a reputable source may be hard to find! 
--Rachel 22:56, 3 Oct 2006
:I think it's rubbish too. Of three English Springer Spaniels owned by my family in succession, two have "smiled" in exactly the same way that the Dalmatian here is doing. -- Necrothesp 01:19, 12 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Smiles

message: In response to the picture request, I have added two new photographs of our dog Paris (or Zagrab's Temptress at TNG), who is now retired from showing. Both pictures are from different angles, showing the front and side of the dog, both in the stacked, show conformation style.
Mllefantine 01:23, 12 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: New Picture

message: Found this while reading the history section of the article: "...However, no historical evidence of this breed being present in the Balkans dates before the early 20th century, when they where brought there by England." This is simply not true. There is a handful of evidence that these dogs were bred in Dalmatia during the medieval ages and where used as war dogs for taking down horses by biting them at the snout. In fact, there was a whole regiment equipped with these animals that fought against the Turks in the battle of Mohacko polje. 161.53.129.244 14:04, 22 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Historical inaccuracy

message: There was a statement saying that no other breed has spotted markings "(except for the "Harlequin" variety of the Great Dane). This is false: a harlequin's markings are more akin to a cow's patchy black markings; patches of color are undesirable on dalmatians, with the standard calling for clearly distinguishable, round spots (key here is the distinction between spot and patch). While it's true that a certain resemblance exists between dalmatians and harlequin great danes, it should be phrased in a way that makes it clear that it's just a resemblance, and in no way are the dalmatian's spots non-unique among dogs. With apologies to Ossipewsk, I chose to remove the statement since it's a bit misleading; I'm not opposed to adding this information again but please phrase in a way that makes this issue as clear as possible. Thanks! Roadmr (t|c) 02:07, 7 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Fair call, I guess.  Although I'd point out that most of the article's Dally show-pictures (including the first three head shots and the type-photo in the InfoBox) show specimens where the dark markings on the front half of the dogs could accurately be called "patches" rather than "spots" - especially on the ears, necks and chests.  They're certainly larger than the "size of a dime to the size of a half-dollar" spots defined by the AKC standard and just as big, proportionately, as the black markings on a harlequin Great Dane.--Ossipewsk 03:46, 7 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Comparison with harlequin great danes 

message: I note a lot of words and phrases like "must" and "is not acceptable" in this article (e.g. "In liver Dalmatians, the nose must always be brown", "The blue eye is not acceptable in British Dalmatians"). It's written a little too much like a dog show handbook. Just because a dog does not meet the strict requirements of showing does not mean it's "not acceptable", just that it can't be shown. The whole tone strikes me, as a dog lover but not someone in any shape or form interested in the artificial world of dog shows, as somewhat arrogant, and I really think it should be rewritten in a slightly less condescending tone. By all means say what the dog show requirements are, but don't imply that dogs which are slightly outside those requirements are somehow inferior or unacceptable, any more than you would imply that human beings who are not among the "beautiful people" are somehow inferior or unacceptable. This is no more than a POV, and as in every other class of article there is no place for it in Wikipedia. -- Necrothesp 00:35, 12 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Hey! I've gone ahead and edited the article a little bit to improve it in this regard. I rephrased the indication that the british standard does not accept "such small" animals, to merely state the documented requirement for taller dogs. I also outright removed the "blue eye is not acceptable" sentence since it's unsourced and even the standard makes no mention of that requirement. I believe those two sentences were the worst offenders; I'll think of a way to rephrase the rest of the article to reflect the fact that, while a dalmatian not conforming to the standard will do poorly on the show floor, it's still a perfectly good dog. I know my dalmatian would fail miserably on a show but you should see the way she turns heads when we're walking her. Dalmatian charm rules! Roadmr (t|c) 00:25, 21 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Good work. I've done a bit of copyediting. Hopefully all kennel club snobbishness now eliminated. -- Necrothesp 13:13, 21 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Use of language

message: Can someone please change the section which details the size of the spots? To anyone outside of America, the size of a quarter or a dime means nothing. I would change it, but I have no idea of the size of these coins! Thanks KillerKat (talk) 20:18, 23 October 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Americanisms

message: A review of Imbris' edit history reveals a nasty and chauvinistic, ill-informed user who refuses other users who have well-researched, scholarly contributions. 
Imbris is using this page to create an "FCI" type page, and in doing so, has reduced this forum to a political one. 
I see now why the content of this page has been substandard for all these years while the breed pages for other breeds has truly excelled. 
The nasty, selfish actions of an egotist can really defeat the entire purpose of WIKIPEDIA. 
Witness the Dalmatian page. 
Woodrowpongo (talk) 20:28, 25 March 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: User Imbris

message: This article is awful.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 206.174.229.189 (talk) 04:29, 26 January 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Re-write needed

message: The headings, “Appearance”, “Body”, “Size”, “Coat”, “Coloring” are basically a few of the key points of  the breed standard (usually the AKC, with occasional marginal notes about other nations’ breed standard).  The author has also thrown breed standard information into other sections, where it does not really belong (e.g. discussion of coat disqualifications in paragraph 1 – inappropriately specific level of detail re: one aspect of dog ownership, conformation showing). The next section, which should contain specifics, remains general. 
I suggest a comprehensive review of the breed standard. This could even include the three major kennel clubs, US, UK and Canada. The subheadings are: General Appearance, Temperament, Size, Coat/Colour, Skull, Muzzle, Eyes, Ears, Neck, Topline/Body, Forequarters, Hindquarters, Tail, Feet, and Gait. 
Gestation period is not specific to the Dalmatian. It makes little sense to state "Dalmatian's gestation is about 2 months". Gestation for all dogs is the same. 
Woodrowpongo (talk) 20:11, 22 December 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Re: Breed Standard 

message: The accuracy of the statements in this section is uknown: unsourced, they seem to reflect a point of view, which is not an acceptable purpose for a WIKI.
Further, the content of the questionable statements is redundant, merely repeating what the author has already tried to advance in the section entitled "Training". 
Here again, if there is any place for this type of statement in a wiki, then my view is that it is under a heading such as "Breed Rescue" - conditions which led to the need for breed rescues and/or tested their capacities. 
Otherwise, these statements lack the neutrality which is necessary for a quality WIKI entry. 
As much as one might agree with them, they have little place in an encyclopedia. Making such arguments is the job of breed rescues, humane societies, and professional dog breeders. Encyclopedias can POINT to these sources, but must not adopt their views. To do so is against WIKI policy.   
Woodrowpongo (talk) 20:11, 22 December 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Re: Popularity Section 

message: The portion on Budweiser Beer and Anheuser-Busch does not belong in the section called History. 
As it stands, it sounds a little like an endorsement for a brewery, thus weakening the perceived reliability of this article. 
I suggest the approach taken in the Old English Sheepdog wiki page: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Old_English_Sheepdog
There, the breed is also commercially associated with a paint manufacturer, Dulux. The heading used is Miscellaneous. Under the heading, the story -- which is of interest only to those who know of the Dulux dog -- is given. 
I suggest hiving off the Anheuser-Busch reference in a similar fashion, as it is only a regional reference, unknown outside of the US. Other regional writers/editors would then feel welcome to add their own regional *mascots* in advertising, without the article seeming to be an endorsement of Budweiser. 
Woodrowpongo (talk) 19:41, 22 December 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Re: History Section 

message: PROBLEM
This section does not belong in an encylopedic breed description, as its content represents an individual's Point of View, and therefore do not meet WIKI criteria. Approaches to basic training is (in most normal circumstances)are not specific to breeds. 
The content is additionally suspect because it is anthropomorphized (as mentioned by an editor below), key statements being unsourced.
The author also conflates breed rescue services with training. The temptation to make the linkage between training challenges and breed rescue is understandable, but not permitted by WIKI (because it is a point of view, rather than a fact). 
Further, there is nothing breed-specific about dogs being given up because owners are too lazy to train them. It is a rather offensive that the first statement about training deals with the author's view of people who get it wrong. 
SUGGESTED APPROACH
I suggest replacing this with a link to the WIKI section on Dog Training and Behaviour, located at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Dog_training_and_behavior
The author's interests can be accommodated, if they can be stated according to WIKI criteria (no personal points of view), by adding a section entitled, Breed Rescue. 
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Dog_training_and_behavior 
Woodrowpongo (talk) 19:29, 22 December 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Re: Training Section 

message: I heard that Dalmatians were not good family pets and can be aggressive. Is that true or did that just come out of nowhere? I'm only wondering because I was writing an article for a newsletter and I want my facts to be true. It's a Dalmatian article for a dog newsletter.
Like all improperly handled and trained dogs, Dalmatians can be very aggressive and dangerous. Their heritage is in guarding things (carriages, horses, etc.) and they are very territorial. Dalmatians are, however, the most affectionate breed of dog I have ever come across. With proper obedience training and curbing of bad behaviors, Dalmatians make wonderful family dogs. The thing is that you can't just plop a full-grown, untrained Dalmatian into a gaggle of small children and expect it to play nice. It takes work.
This is information that has been perpetuated since bad breeding practices* and innapropriate ownership / lack of excercise training became commonplace after a certain films release led to an upsurge in popularity. Its an opinion I am often questioned over when walking my Dalmatian, and people are amazed that he adores kids and is extremely gentle. Any breed of dog if improperly trained/ stimulated/ exercised/ socialised could be aggresive or develop other personality flaws. I see no evidence that dalmatians display a worse tendency in this respect. They are certainly energetic and require stimulation or can become destructive but that is the same for many similarly active breeds. Part of the belief may also have been perpetuated as adults told children that dalmatians didnt like children to negate requests for such a pet after seeing THE FILM. This has been brought to my attention as a number of people who have queried my pets temperament came to there belief exactly this way.
Dalmatians have since declined in popularity and the number of breeders has dropped greatly (certainly in my area - Ontario). More responsible breeding means generally better temperament and health of the breed, but long waiting list and a lengthy journey may be required if you want to  a pet "spotter".
 
Gnarlyswine.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.75.172.53 (talk) 16:36, 29 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Not good family pets? 

message: I have been editing the pages with great care (i.e. only the 'Training' and 'Other Issues section'. My statements are primarily from the Dalmatians welfare point of view than a seller's point of view. In case you are deleting statements or modifying them, please indicate here, by way of discussion, clearly why you choose to do so. In particular, I would appreciate it if the first sentence in the training section is not deleted. Please sign up to one of the Dalamation rescues and see the plight of these lives brought upon by ignorance of the facts in the training section.
- Some of the spellings in there might seem a tad strange; they are not incorrect.
192.100.124.218 12:00, 21 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: It's dalmatiAn, not dalmatiOn. ;-)--Pointeprincess 22:57, 7 April 2007 (UTC)

text: While Dalmatian welfare is important, considering this is an encyclopedia, th most important thing is to provide unbiased, accurate, and professional information. Although I personal may agree with some of the views sighted on the training page, they belong on a personal web site, NOT in an encyclopedia. Mllefantine 20:37, 12 April 2007 (UTC)

text: I believe it would be okay for you to edit it. Dalmatians are pretty stubborn and many people might write a published article saying that Dalmatians are one of the most sensitive breeds, which is not true. That will lead even more people to the wrong conclusion. I say: "Change it so it does not show they are more sensitive then most dogs."  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.80.205.55 (talk) 05:38, 6 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Dalmatian Training

message: "Blue eyes are regarded as a fault by many organisations because Dalmatians with blue eyes are entirely deaf in the ear(s) on the same side(s) as the blue eyes."  Any sources/evidence of this???  Back it up or it should be removed ...   67.161.186.85 06:05, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Agreed.  From personal experience (and numerous searches), blue eyes are not a definitive trait of deafness.  However occurrences of deafness are significantly higher in dogs with blue eyes (and the Dalmatian has a significantly higher number of occurrences of deafness than many other breeds).  Kameron 07:47, 14 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Research by the Dalmatian Club of America suggests that there may be a link between blue eyes and deafness. I added the citation on the main page where the citation was needed. Mllefantine 19:24, 11 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Blue eyes linked to deafness

message: Temple Grandin noted in Animals in Translation that dalmatians suffer from temperament problems due to the chemical whose lack causes the distinctive coloration also being a calming hormone.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.69.118.1 (talk) 00:19, 3 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Animals in Translation () would seem to be a reliable source per the guidelines, so I suppose the information can be added— just be sure to properly cite the addition using a footnote. I myself like to use the citation templates to make sure I have it formatted correctly. Cheers! —Elipongo (Talk contribs) 01:43, 3 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Temple Grandin on behavior   

message: I have edited this article to remove the improper NPOV and citation tagging added by Woodrowpongo. If this user or any other wishes to reinstate these changes, please use proper NPOV templates for the article, and proper formatting for tagging unsourced claims. --Trunkalunk (talk) 05:21, 26 December 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  12/22 edits by user Woodrowpongo 

message: Kidney and bladder stones
The section called "Kidney and bladder stones" contains the following inaccurate information. 
Uricase: the article makes two contradictory statements (1) that the uric acid problem is a fact of liver transport, not absence of the enzyme and (2) that the enzyme is not present in the gene pool at all. As for the pathology, the enzyme is actually present; the problem is with re-absorption by the kidneys. 
Crosses to English Pointers: this section makes the mistake of presenting itself as neutral when it is actually a scientist's as-yet unproven hypothesis. It also reflects a misunderstanding of the mechanism leading to urinary stones in Dalmatians. 
The article states"the 'normal'  gene for uricase is not present in the breed's gene pool at all. Therefore, there is no possibility of eliminatring hyperuricemia among pure-bred [sic] Dalmatians. The only possible solution o this problem must then be crossing Dalmatians with other breeds in order to reintroduce the 'normal uricase gene." 
The section then goes on to describe the "Dalmatian-Pointer Backcross Project" as well as a history of internal business of the Dalmatian Club of Canada with respect to the backcross progeny. 
*a) This is not fact: this is the hypothesis and scientific assumption of a genetic theorist, Dr. Robert Schaible. It is as yet unproven. 
*b) It is a mis-statement of the genetic defect: the defect is not in uricase production but uptake and conversion. 
*c) the "Dalmatian-Pointer Backcross Project" is now known as the Dalmatian Heritage Project, and is still the subject of  controversy. The project deals with the goal of finding Low Uric Acid (LUA) Dalmatians.  Dr. Schaible's hypothesis is unproven; the results of the genetic experiment are also as yet unproven.
*d) the level of detail with respect to the internal business conducted by the Dalmatian Club of America, is excessive, and not really relevant to an encyclopedic entry meant to describe the breed in general detail.    
Gout is a secondary complication that would only afflict a small percentage of the small percentage of Dalmatians that suffer from manifest symptoms of high uric acid. Gout therefore is overspecialized as an encyclopedia entry on general information on the breed. Therefore, mentioning gout and its treatment is not necessary, and may be misleading. 
RECOMMENDATIONS 
# state the pathology correctly;
# give an overview of theory of the backcross project and where to find additional information;
# state that controversy exists and where to find additional information, including Dalmatian specialty clubs' points of view.
Woodrowpongo (talk) 14:25, 28 December 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Genetic Urinary Defect in Dalmatians 

message: *http://www.fci.be/uploaded_files/Statutes%20Acapulco%202007_EN.doc
First of all discussions go below one other.
And now let me explain the Statutes of the FCI, latest accepted in Acapulco on May 22nd, 2007
Some definitions:
Breed Standard:	Ideal cynological description of a breed.
National canine organisation: An all-breed national canine organisation recognised by the FCI.
*Article 2g - defining and publishing the characteristics of each breed after previous approval by the FCI (General Assembly or General Committee) based on the breed standards of the country of origin or of the country of patronage.
My comment: the breed standards of the country of origin is the one that superseed the translations to four official languages of the FCI, French, English, German and Spanish.
*Article 9c subsection 7 - to respect the FCI breeds standards and breed nomenclature
No comment neccessary. Even to the editor based in Canada Privy Council Office.
*Article 3 - Discrimination of any kind against a country, private person or groups of people on account of ethnic origin, gender, language, religion, politics or any other reason is strictly prohibited within the FCI and punishable by suspension or expulsion.
No comment neccessary.
Imbris (talk) 21:56, 25 March 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Statutes of the FCI 

message: This article focuses too much on the AKC's standards for the dogs. I came to the page to learn about the dog, not what is or is not acceptable in the show ring. I think that all of the AKC's standards should be gathered and put together into one section.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.32.157.205 (talk) 05:44, 18 January 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: If you want to learn about a purebred dog, you will get a lot of kennel club information. These types of clubs celebrate the purebred dog and are the best place to get accurate information about purebred dogs. Mllefantine (talk) 03:29, 20 February 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Too much focus on AKC

message: The claim that : "Due to the minimal amount of oil in their coat, Dalmatians lack a "dog" smell and stay fairly clean." although has a citation, is not based on logic and seems to be an opinion. I have not altered the main page, as I don't have the reference book cited to check the accuracy, but I wouldn't have thought that oil would cause smell, more likely it is another reason that they stay clean, if in fact this is not a generalisation. The Wiki page for dog odor http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dog_odor does not mention any special dalmation ability for odor. 60.234.229.163 (talk) 02:19, 31 July 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Characteristics section 

message: Substituted at 14:37, 1 May 2016 (UTC)
thread_title: Assessment comment