Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Dogs/Archive T

message: :(Moved from Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Dog breeds.) Elf | Talk 04:39, 30 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Looks good to me -- sannse (talk) 21:49, 30 Apr 2004 (UTC)

text: Bah, let me just stick my foot in my mouth. just had a quick look through the breeds and discovered that a few DO have both "alternate names" and "common nicknames" (such as the Airdale Terrier and the American Eskimo Dog). I suppose this means im free to add the "common nicknames" section to the breeds i know nicknames for :) . toodles Tekana 22:16, 7 August 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Common Nickname

message: :(Moved from User talk:Elf/Archive dogs. Elf | Talk 20:14, 31 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, huh, I've never heard of the others you mentioned but UKC is probably 2nd to AKC.  Yeah, AKC is the most major one, so I agree let's not add the others to the table after all.  I'll see what I can find out about the various ones & maybe come up with some standard verbiage. Elf | Talk 05:06, 28 Mar 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: So you think we should include just the UKC, leaving out the rest?  Or just stick with the AKC?  (I'm looking at a breed only recognised by the UKC and I'm not sure which part of the table to add it to yet) -- sannse (talk) 09:47, 28 Mar 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: What I've found out so far: UKC respected as a registry & definitely a legit organization, although there's some suspicion why people with AKC-recognized breeds would register w/UKC. Some excellent reasons; some bad reasons.   National Dog Registry is for tattoos. Continental Kennel Club and National Kennel Club are "for puppy mills". Elf | Talk 20:34, 29 Mar 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: OK, sounds like we should include the UKC and ignore the others.  Thanks Elf -- sannse (talk) 19:50, 30 Mar 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: US registries

message: I've looked around, and I'd say that the breed club entry is where this might best go.  Currently, it suggests that these fall into two categories only - those that maintain their own registries while lobbying for the acceptance of a breed by the all-breed clubs and those that act as social clubs for the owners while letting the all-breed clubs run the registry.
An additional paragraph pointing out that some breed clubs are adamantly opposed to recognition by all-breed clubs - and are fighting against involuntary takeovers of the breeds by the all-breed clubs - would certainly seem apropos.
--jdege 21:26, 2004 Dec 1 (UTC)
:Good question where the matter(s) are best addressed.  You're right, breed club could be one; breed registry (hmm, doesn't exist yet--thought it did--someone better create it cuz there are a lot of pages pointing to it! and more in a minute when I get done disambig'ing) could be another; somewhere out there there's a discussion about open vs closed stud books (selective breeding? Yup, there it is.).  Some parts of the discussion might go in all places, or maybe all the related discussions should be gathered in one place--I don't have a perfect answer for ya.  So you're probably safe in any of those places.  As we often say on Wikipedia, Be bold! Elf | Talk 02:29, 2 Dec 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: Oh, and just found more at purebred and dog breeding.
Not sure if this thread is still current or stale, but since I have been looking for the best place within Wikipedia to start contributing under some sort of a dog "registry OR club" heading, I like to suggest that there should be category for "breed-clubs" that could link to dogs, cats, horses, etc., AND all of their related breeding, registry, and training clubs/organizations, which is an absolute jungle that no single person can know completely. The North-American dog-registry-club-environment is relatively simple, compared to the International dog-registry-club-environment, which I tried to penetrate a few years ago (as can be seen on this page).
BTW, I found that two registry articles Breed registry AND registry do excist now, but nothing for Hundezucht. And I think that there needs to be a corrolation between the German and the English registry articles, because the international environment is so much more complicated and most of the reliable info of it will likely come from German sorces. --Rgsd 20:31, 7 August 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Return to discussion

message: :(Moved from Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Dog breeds.) Elf | Talk 04:39, 30 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Do you mean a smaller version of the picture that when you move the cursor over it it's obvious that you can click to enlarge?  I like this too.  Overly-large pictures dominate the article and take ages to load. Quill 07:06, 7 Sep 2004 (UTC)

text: I agree. I like the pictures with the border and expand icon better. I'm going to leave ChicXulub a message on their talk page to see why they changed all of our images (they apparently did it in other categories too). Lachatdelarue (talk) 13:58, 7 Sep 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: Huh. I got back after 3 days off, checked my watchlist in chronological order, and just went to work fixing most of the images before I ever went to Chic's talk page or looked here--I figured that if he/she had looked here, the changes wouldn't have been made.  So...  see *my* note on User talk:ChicXulub. Elf | Talk 06:23, 8 Sep 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: Heh, I probably should have been bold and done the same.  Thanks Elf -- sannse (talk) 17:24, 8 Sep 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Format of images in tables

message: :(Moved from Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Dog breeds.) Elf | Talk 04:39, 30 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks for the heads up.  Elf | Talk 19:17, 7 Mar 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Removing dog stubs

message: :(Copied from Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Dog breeds.) Elf | Talk 04:48, 30 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Oh, cool! I'm a sucker for this kind of stuff.  So if anyone else wants an example, you can look at my user page.  Elf | Talk 01:37, 14 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  silly.  dog breed button 

message: :(Moved from Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Dog breeds.) Elf | Talk 04:48, 30 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Infobox usage

message: :(Copied from Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Dog breeds.) Elf | Talk 04:48, 30 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Corrections and fixes

message: {| border=1 cellspacing=0 align=left cellpadding=2 width=150 hspace=3
General breed characteristics<BR>(varies—see standards)example #2
Height at withers
Female: 24 in. (61 cm)<BR>
Male: 26-27 in. (66-68 cm)
Weight
Female: 75-80 lbs (34-36 kg)
Male: 90 lbs (41 kg)
Coat
Short
Colors
Red, black, pink, purple, teal, seafoam green
OK, I have moved the Stds links in the standard breed table (main project page) per the example. Have at it. :-)
Also, for appearance info, after reviewing comments & thinking about how I'd apply it to several breeds, I think it's better in an optional separate table--because different breeds have different ways of specifying things, some don't specify some things, others specify others, plus when creating a new breed table for a new breed article it already takes me 15-20 minutes to put one in just with looking up the breed links & alt names--I don't want to discourage myself by feeling forced to put in the other info, too.  So it looks as though the table here is the preferred one.  
Any more comments on it? It doesn't have to use pink & gray but I thought I'd be consistent with the main breed table.  Elf | Talk 21:04, 29 Mar 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Breed table standards

message: The only other thing I could think of doing to the main breed table (before modifying all the Stds locations) would be to create a simpler-to-read template that might look (in part) something like this:

Instead of like this for the same content:

Dobermann

Alternative names

{| align=center
Doberman Pinscher

I know Sannse isn't fond of a proliferation of templates, but this seems like a good one for it (and maybe the smaller appearance table, too).  One big advantage in something like this (other than it being easier to understand) is that, if we want to tweak the general appearance or colors of the table, or the text of the headings or the order of the sections, we can do it in one place. Elf | Talk 21:52, 29 Mar 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: One possible improvement

message: ... is at Template talk:Infobox Dogbreed.  Elf | Talk 15:45, 1 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: More discussion on template and appearance

message: I feel that the current link that is provided in the standard infobox (canadasguidetodogs.com) to find CKC standards is inadequate, and should be changed to go to the CKC website. Here is my reasoning: Canada's Guide to Dogs doesn't provide pages on all of the CKC breeds. Thus, occasionally editors who make the infoboxes assume that the breed isn't accepted when in fact it is, just because that breed doesn't have a page on the current link. Out of curiosity, why doesn't it link to the CKC website? --Pharaoh Hound (talk) 19:36, 13 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  CKC standard links in infobox 

message: The link to List of dog-related templates doesn't work in Template:mergefrom on this page because mergefrom apparently automatically inserts the same namespace prefix, hence it's trying to link to "Wikipedia:List of dog-related templates", which doesn't exist. 
Anyway, this project page (Wikipedia:WikiProject Dog breeds/Templates) has been around for quite a while and is in the project namespace, where I think stuff like this belongs, not in the main article namespace. If I'm wrong and there's now a whole raft of stuff like that out in the main namespace:
*Please provide a link here that indicates that
*Merge from here to there instead of vice-versa, but look for links to this place and fix 'em.
Elf | Talk 03:52, 17 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I've merged the pages and added a redirect from List_of_dog-related_templates. I'll go through and change any links in need of changing. Jerazol 07:54, 17 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Merge proposal

message: The reason I ask is that :Category:Dog Breeds is large enough to be unwieldy and it would be much better for user navigation for the dogs to be grouped in subcategories, as :Category:Hounds (containing :Category:Sight hounds and :Category:Scent hounds), etc., at least loosely following the conventional categorisations of the major kennel clubs.  Thus the general category page will not only help navigation, but also help to inform users on the various groupings of breeds.
As long as the breed articles are automatically added to :Category:Dog breeds, this has no benefit.  If all of the subcategories appeared on the first page of the category listing, this would not be a problem, but as it is they are scattered through the "next 200" pages with the alphabet. --7Kim 01:01, 6 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Do the templates automatically add the article to [[:Category:Dog breeds]]? 

message: Updated according to new Animalia color. See Wikipedia_talk:Taxobox_usage#Another_color_for_animal-taxobox.3F --165.21.154.93 (talk) 06:35, 29 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: New color

message: Hi. Let me know if this is the right place to address this, but I've noticed that in all the infoboxes I've checked (which I'm sure is a small portion of the whole) clicking on the link to the UKC breed standard immediately pulls up a box asking for a logon and password. The link is some sort of a mailto: address. I changed the link on the American Pit Bull Terrier page to the official breed standard on the UKC website . I'm happy to go along and fix other pages, but if I'm overstepping or fixing something that ain't broke, will someone more involved with WikiProject Dogs let me know. Somerut (talk) 06:09, 12 October 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: If you wouldn't mind responding or linking to my talk page where I might notice a response sooner? Somerut (talk) 06:11, 12 October 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: UKC breed standard links all wrong?

message: The  template adds an article to :Category:Wikipedia requested breed photographs.  I'd like to propose using instead , which would add them to :Category:Wikipedia requested photographs of breeds.  The advantage is that dog articles could get , cat articles could get , and so on.  Articles for breeds that are specific to a particular continent or country could get additional location tags, e.g. Japanese Terrier could get , which would add the article to :Category:Wikipedia requested photographs in Japan on top of the other categories.
What do you all think?  Does anyone object to that idea? Tim Pierce (talk) 18:09, 7 April 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  reqbreedphoto vs reqphoto 

message: I have proposed replacing  with  on all existing pages.  Please read my proposal at Template talk:Reqbreedphoto and add your opinions. Tim Pierce (talk) 14:04, 15 April 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  proposed: replace reqbreedphoto with reqphoto 

message: I think it would be a good idea to have a Mastiff footer for the bottom of pages realting to types of mastiff dog. If anyone knows how to I would be happy to do it.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 07bargem (talk • contribs) 09:39, 27 May 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Mastiff Footer

message: What template do we use when....
1)...the referent isn't an official dog breed or dog type, but a dog type as with cocker spaniel?
2)...the referent isn't Canis lupus familiaris but Canis lupus dingo, such as the New Guinea Singing Dog?
3)...the dog is Canis lupus familiaris but isn't a recognized breed with classifications and standards, such as the Nureongi?
4)...sources disagree as to whether it's C.l.familiaris or C.l.dingo?
Chrisrus (talk) 06:04, 25 June 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  What template do we use when.... 

message: The article appears to be categorised and is therefore appearing in several irrelevant dog categories. 213.246.84.135 (talk) 20:52, 18 June 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Article is appearing in dog categories