Talk:Walkaloosa

message: The Walkaloosa is NOT a cross between a Tennessee Walking Horse and an Appaloosa. 
It comes from Paso Fino / Spanish bloodlines and is a gaited Appaloosa-patterned horse.
http://www.thegaitedhorse.com/walkaloosa.htm — Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.27.161.94 (talk) 01:28, 18 October 2006
According to the Walkaloosa Horse Association, a Walkaloosa is 
*the foal of a Walkaloosa Mare and Stallion
or
*an Appaloosa that can perform an intermediate gait (such as the foxtrot, rack, running walk, etc.)
or
*the foal of verified Appaloosa and gaited horse blood
The WHA's website is here.--PaintHorseLover 01:22, 19 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: So there are two "breeds" of gaited Appaloosas?  With what, 20 horses in each "registry?"  Well, if someone who actually cares wants to expand the articles to explain why there is any significance to this difference (both are for people who can't ride a trot?) and why anyone should care, other than the 2 breeders who don't get along and started their own separate clubs, well, edit away. Just watch linkspam and peacock phrases.  Sorry to be sarcastic, I just think some of these "breeds" are just ways people try to up the price of crossbreds to make money off the unsuspecting... Montanabw 19:10, 19 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merging? 

message: Breeds of horses become such by the efforts of humans to refine traits. Registries are involved to keep records of these efforts. 
The Quarter Horse was just a grade animal until it went through this process, as were all the other breeds. 
To Merge the Tiger Registries with the Walkaloosa Registry would be the same as merging the QTR Horse with the Thoroughbred, after all they have many horses registered in common, so why not?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.142.130.13 (talk) 04:25, 26 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, see, that is EXACTLY why I question this stuff, so many of these "registries" are one person's personal commercial promotion. (And why spots make people lose all reason, I don't know, but spots seem to cause more debates than anything else out there, though people who dig chestnuts with flaxen manes are almost as intense)   I am glad to see this article expanded, but what to do with the other one?   Seems like everyone who has a gaited horse with spots wants to make it into a "breed."  Drives me completely crazy.  See WP:NOT.  Question:  If I tagged Tiger horse for deletion, would YOU have a problem with that??  Can you give me some sources for it being a one-person show? Montanabw(talk) 06:07, 27 January 2008 (UTC)

text: Hmmph.  It gets worse, there are TWO different "Tiger horse" organizations and gaited horse magazine did an article on them, sort of explaining the spat.  Seems they are as notable as your SJHS horses are, from an objective point of view.  (These "breeds" drive me nuts, someone crosses a Gypsy Vanner on a Quarter Horse and claims they have a new breed these days!  We have about 350 horse breed article in here, it's an avalanche!)  For now, I am going to throw an NPOV tag on the Tiger horse article, toss the merge tags and add some more refs. (Why me?)  Montanabw(talk) 08:05, 27 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  To Merge or Not to merge the articles, that is the question.