Talk:Dog behaviourist

message: I don't understand the reversion from "K9 dog trainers, who use" to "K9 Dogs, who uses".  If it's referring to police dog trainers, it shd be "K9 dog trainers"--mmm, sorry, shd be K-9 dog trainers, and hence plural.  If it's a reference to some other organization, I'm not familiar with it--like a police dog training academy or what? Elf | Talk 01:17, 27 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: k9 dogs

message: In my experience, this description " is a generic term for any professional who works towards modifying and managing the behaviour of dogs and behaviour problems such as aggression, separation anxiety, fears and phobias and obsessive compulsive behaviors." (which was just removed in favor of "the difference between a trainer and behaviorist is academic qualification")  is a much more accurate one. It might be true that one or two organizations are attempting to come up with a standard that requires someone to have a degree in veterniary medicine to become certified through their organization, but most dog behaviorists whom I have encountered are far and above the standard dog trainer in their ability to solve problems with dogs, and not all of them have a special college degree; by far the largest component of a good dog behaviorist is experience. 
Can the user who keeps putting back the very narrow definition please explain?  Elf | Talk 08:17, 17 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Definition of dog behaviorist

message: This is a self-promotion definition of a fake organization with no members and it should be erased. You are the one misleading the public with your narrow definition. A behaviourist is a person that has some sort of academic degree.   You said: "in my experience", well that does not qualify you to "create" a definition from the air, unless you can prove that you have an academic degree. What are your qualifications? From what I read in your site, you have no creadentials. Again, a behaviourist is not a dog trainer nor a whisperer. Cesar Millan was a groomer who in 1999 was calling different dog trainers in Los Angeles area because he wanted to become a trainer. He doesn't have 20 years plus of experience. He then hired a PR company (Jazzmyne PR, 2001) and they made up his background. He got lucky and hit the newspapers in 2001 thanks to the PR company, not to his experience. He only belongs to one organization that was founded by the manufacturers of electric collars and fences (dogpro), did you know that? He has been rejected by the APDT because of the usage of harsh methods. What you see on TV is edited video... Wake up! What you see on TV is not what is scientific.
:You seem to be confusing two different editors. I am not promoting anything, but in my experience with solving problems with my dogs over the years through various professionals including the SPCA, a dog behaviorist is not inherently someone with a special degree, but someone with special skills in diagnosing and solving behavioral issues with dogs. Unlike "veterinarian", there is no requirement for a degree in anything.  It seems to me that promoting that is promoting someone else's agenda, not the real world.  I can easily see removing a specific name from the article and in fact will do so, but your narrow definition doesn't seem to fit most dog behaviorists that I've encountered. However, I will concede that I don't ask about academic degrees--I ask about experience and references and such. I will try contacting the local SPCA for more info. Elf | Talk 15:32, 22 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Response:

message: I've removed some things like "hence behaviourist who are mobile and often far more effective than office bound practices" which is a blanket statement that I doubt can be proven; they might be more effective for certain types of issues, but for other types of issues someone who has an offsite working location or office might be far more effective.  I've removed specific names from the body of the article because it's not clear that they are anything like typical behaviorists or trainers--they seem to be mostly TV personalities, which might be worth something but not a primary mention as examples of typical dog behaviorists.  Note that I added links that have nothing to do with specific organizations to get outside opinions, please don't do blanket reverts like that.  I did connect with a humane society behaviorist who said that academic background is important in becoming a behaviorist, but I'm sure that there are individuals who don't work for the SPCA or Humane Society who call themselves behaviorists anyway. Still, browsing as many humane society type links as I could find and job descriptions, they all seem to want specific training and certification. The article needs to reflect this and I have attempted to do so.  Elf | Talk 20:21, 24 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: More editing discussion

message: Ok, Paul. You got 6 members in your organization. APDT in the US has 5,000 plus. Who is right? As I said before, I checked your background and you don't have any credentials, there is no need for you to lie about having a PhD. This is not a personal attack, it is reality. Don't rush now to make changes to your site and lie saying that you have a PhD., the internet keeps track of everything you do.
Try over 70 members in my organisation, all who are communicating with each other for the benifit of their own development and to better the profession.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.106.182.188 (talk) 09:43, 3 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Yet More editing discussion

message: I have several points. First, the policy, or rather, guideline of Wikipedia is not to post what you BELIEVE to be true, but rather, what the common belief is. And since there is no common criteria of what qualifies as a dog behaviourist, you shoud post this; not what you BELIEVE should qualify as a dog behaviourist. Most people do not set a criteria for what a dog behaviourist must go through to become one, unlike you; there are no established set of criterias. Second, you cite Cesar Millan as having little to no experience, no academic degrees, etc., and yet, based on video evidence, clearly, his methods work -- so citing Millan is detrimental to your case, since Millan lacks what you require as a criteria for a true dog behaviourist, but is probably more effective than a lot of other "qualified" trainers/behaviourists. Your point about the video being edited is pointless; I'm a video editor, and although you can do a lot with editing, you can't create something out of the blue -- at least, not to a degree where one would believe it. You can't make magic happen. Another thing; they don't call Cesar Millan the Dog Whisperer because he "whispers" to dogs, or has some kind of telepathic communication or supernatural 6th sense thing going on -- he's just a very good behaviourist, with the ability to "read" a dog.
Well said
Sources refer to Cesar Millan as a "renowned dog behaviorist". That's all that matters, what sources say, not editors opinions. Here are just a few sources:    
-    
-    
-  HGB 19:50, 2 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Personal response to debate 

message: (ARTICLE TEXT REMOVED)
I have personally added Cesar Millan's lawsuit in both of his articles. In other words; I ALREADY KNEW OF THESE LAWSUITS. There is no need to add the full text here in the Discussions. Both articles are ALREADY linked in appropriate articles BY ME. I repeat; BY ME; yesterday. BY ME. Fuckers.
The second lawsuit; or rather, the first lawsuit, which accuses Millan of Breach of Contract claims that he stole the Dog Whisperer name. Does not argue for or against Millan; or whether or not he is worthy of the title "dog behaviourist". So; the point of adding that text here is mute. In the entertainment industry; people get sued all over the fucking place.
The first lawsuit, which claims that Cesar's Psychology Center created severe wounds to a Lab. It DID NOT STATE whether or not it was Cesar himself, or his workers. Although it could be argued that these articles / lawsuits serve to show that Cesar is perhaps a "careless" or "bad" dog behaviourist;  SINCE THERE IS NO FUCKING CRITERIA that exists that deems someone a dog-behaviourists, the articles SHOULD ALL FUCKING REFLECT THAT.
So; stop changing the articles; or I will have YOU (yes, you) warned or blocked; or the articles related to Millan locked to Users only (I will be glad to get a username). Of course; none of this will have to happen if you FUCKING REASON with me why you keep FUCKING CHANGING THE ARTICLES! Again, I repeat; if you honestly believe that what you are saying is RIGHT; than you should be man enough to debate it openly. If you continue to vandalise articles senselessly, I WILL report this (actually, I'll report this right now, but it's merely a warning). And if someone feels offended by the excessive use of curse-words; it's for legal reasons; it's probably better that I call the guy a Fucker than a Liar; "liar" would more likely result in lawsuits, as it makes an assumption and discredits the liar's credibility.... Whoops. 67.164.209.137 23:13, 6 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Dog Whisperer Cesar Millan sued by pet owner 

message: You can edit as much as you can in this so-called encyclopedia, but you cannot hide the truth from the news articles, associations, websites and forums against Cesar Millan. Have fun, nobody with intellect uses this place as a source of information. And FYI, the South Park episode was a satirical criticism of Cesar's approach, nothing to be proud of. They really nailed him.
:: You obviously have a little mission going for you. Unfortunately, the only one who finds this amusing is yourself. It has nothing to do with supportrs or being proud or ashamed of anything. It has to do with facts.  If you want a mission, I would suggest volunteering at a local cause, instead of expending all your energy and sockpuppets so devoted to one man on a site that you indicate is for those of low intellect. And IMO the SP episode had more to do with treating a child like a dog, which was funny. But, I guess you saw it as being against Cesar. Evident by your countless edits of the same thing, dozens, over 4 Cesar pages using numerous IDs. Oogles 05:19, 24 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  To Cesar Millan Gate Keepers 

message: The strange thing is, your here in this so-called encyclopedia, fighting your little cause against your opinion, well in the world of opinion none is a strong as the weight of numbers. You seem to be on your own here and your view is weak and ill informed, this article was not written to promote Cesar Millan but used him as a point to demonstrate that behaviourists come from all backgrounds mostly training. South Park also sent up the President of the USA are you saying that he really isnt a president because of this?
:: Those who want to watch his campaign and guard against his constant vandalism, watch the following pages:  dog aggression Cesar Millan Dog Whisperer and this page Dog behaviourist  All his edits and all his contributions are in a campaign against Cesar, can see it in talk too when he goes off the deep end more than once.  Note that he has numerous logins, however.  Oogles 22:37, 25 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Strange little man 

message: You can edit as much as you can in this so-called encyclopedia, but you cannot hide the truth from the news articles, associations, websites and forums against Cesar Millan.
:: Associations, websites, and forums against Millan? Where did you get this from? You're the only person I know of who has this campaign against him. Is there some kind of forum dedicated to taking him down or something that I'm not aware of? Show me the links!
Have fun, nobody with intellect uses this place as a source of information. 
::Hey, c'mon. It's a Wiki for cryin' out loud. Give us a break. No, Really.
And FYI, the South Park episode was a satirical criticism of Cesar's approach, nothing to be proud of. They really nailed him.
::You sure it isn't your bias against him that's clouding your judgement? If it was criticism, it would have shown that his techniques would have failed in the end -- sort of like how they ridiculed the super Nanny's; which had no effect at all. In the end, Cartman does go back to being bad, but as a result of his mom needing to spoil him and needing a companion (because Cesar left). It was a criticism on some parents who spoil their children and treat them like friends, instead of a son-mother relationship first -- which is what Cesar Millan warns against; to treat your dogs like dogs first, and THEN friends. 
::And what's your deal anyway? Were you once a victim of a poor dog behaviourist, and now you feel you need to protect the public by somehow showing that Cesar Millan isn't a real behaviourist? What's your problem? I mean, maybe if your were to go on a campaign against life coachers or something; then you'd have a case. And why do you feel you need to edit these Wiki articles so bad? We've offered your our reasons why this article needs to remain NPOV; but you seem to want to add your own bias to it. 24.23.51.27 20:28, 31 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Whats your deal 

message: I've never seen the spelling "behaviourist" before and it's quite unusual to see it used in the literature. Would it be appropriate to change the article title to "Dog behaviorist" and make "Dog behaviourist" into a redirect since it's not the common term? SkrikerandTrash (talk) 05:08, 20 June 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Spelling - Behaviourist vs Behaviorist?