Talk:Shiloh Shepherd dog/Archive 4

message: Please review the proposal Talk:Shiloh_Shepherd_Dog#Dispute(s).  I'd like to take a quick survey of the people involved in the page since no direct comments on the proposal have been received. Please sign your name using three tildes (~~~) under the position you support, possibly adding a brief comment. If you are happy with more than one possibility, you may wish to sign your names to more than one place. Extended commentary should be placed below, in the section marked "Discussion".
===Support all points===
:Support all points  66.188.54.68Suzy Graham, Tantara Shiloh Shepherds66.188.54.68
69.173.135.114Miles D.
Support All Points, JudyShilohshepherd
NobleAcres Gloria
Support all points ShenandoahShilohs 13:58, 28 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Hi Elf: May I ask if you are one of the people affiliated with the "WikiProject Dog breeds" that Jareth has requested as an outside, unaffiliated (w/Shiloh Shepherds) observer to comment on this discussion? 69.173.135.114 08:02, 29 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes (see my note posted below under "Discussion"). So is Trysha. You can find both of our names in the history pages of many many dog breed articles, mine since January '04 and Trysha not quite as long.  Elf | Talk 22:31, 29 December 2005 (UTC)

text: Hi Trysha: May I ask if you are also one of the people that Jareth has requested as an outside, unaffiliated (w/Shiloh Shepherds) observer to comment on this discussion? 69.173.135.114 08:02, 29 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: (She is--see my response above--but I'm sure she'll respond, too. :-) Elf | Talk 22:31, 29 December 2005 (UTC)

text: Could we calm down please?  What on earth does this have to do with the registries?  I'm especially curious since a number of them you recently provided for inclusion offer papers to any dog as long as a veterinarian states their breed. .:.Jareth.:. babelfish 17:21, 28 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Straw Poll 

message: :Support all points  66.188.54.68Suzy Graham, Tantara Shiloh Shepherds66.188.54.68
69.173.135.114Miles D.
Support All Points, JudyShilohshepherd
NobleAcres Gloria
Support all points ShenandoahShilohs 13:58, 28 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Hi Elf: May I ask if you are one of the people affiliated with the "WikiProject Dog breeds" that Jareth has requested as an outside, unaffiliated (w/Shiloh Shepherds) observer to comment on this discussion? 69.173.135.114 08:02, 29 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes (see my note posted below under "Discussion"). So is Trysha. You can find both of our names in the history pages of many many dog breed articles, mine since January '04 and Trysha not quite as long.  Elf | Talk 22:31, 29 December 2005 (UTC)

text: Hi Trysha: May I ask if you are also one of the people that Jareth has requested as an outside, unaffiliated (w/Shiloh Shepherds) observer to comment on this discussion? 69.173.135.114 08:02, 29 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: (She is--see my response above--but I'm sure she'll respond, too. :-) Elf | Talk 22:31, 29 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Support all points

message: I believe the "other" clubs/registeries should have the real reasons for their formation and/or split from the ISSR listed.  It is my opinion that the public has a right to know why they are not willing to follow the original plan in developing the Shiloh Shepherd.  Tony Matzke 04:13, 28 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Support some, but not all points

message: The ISSR is the only true Shiloh Shepherd registry. Susan Olson
I'm not quite sure just how we're suppose to vote here, so I will say it again.  The ISSR is the ONLY organization that can hand out valid Shiloh Shepherd papers.  If your getting your papers from anywhere else the dog could be anything else.  I reject these and any other registry other than ISSR. 67.186.153.43 11:05, 28 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Reject all points

message: ---Per your question below (Jareth asked: Also, are't the registries currently listed only registering Shilo Shepherds, or am I reading incorrectly?), you are correct and I propose that ONLY these registries/clubs limited to the registration of Shiloh Shepherds be included, that is NSBR, TSSR, SSBA, ISSDC, ISSR, and SSDCA. 69.173.135.114Miles D.
I think that EACH registry willing to issue papers for the Shiloh Shepherd should be included!!  Tina M. Barber
I believe the article is about Shiloh Shepherds, thus the listing of the Shiloh specific registries who's sole function is the Shiloh Shepherd Breed. I have no issue with listing the ISSR as the first of these registries. 
152.163.100.132 14:01, 28 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Could we calm down please?  What on earth does this have to do with the registries?  I'm especially curious since a number of them you recently provided for inclusion offer papers to any dog as long as a veterinarian states their breed. .:.Jareth.:. babelfish 17:21, 28 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Discussion

message: Personally I think the article is good as  written now.
I have reviewed the article content per Sandra's suggestiosn below:
The Shiloh Shepherd was developed by breed founder Tina Barber of Shiloh Shepherds Kennel in New York state in a sustained effort over the last third of the 20th century. Her goal was to preserve the type of German Shepherd she remembered as a child in Germany. Those dogs were big, mentally sound, and beautiful. In 1990, Barber separated her dogs from the AKC and in 1991 created the International Shiloh Shepherd Registry (ISSR) (based on Von Stephanitz's SV) as the official governing body for the breed.
As the breed gained recognition and popularity near the turn of the millenium, new registries and clubs began to form, each having their own vision for the future of the breed.
I don't agree with this article as written  as I still feel it is trying to diminish the other club and registries and making the Shiloh Shepherd just seem as if they are just GSD's from Shiloh kennels.
The ISSR may be Barber's "official governing body, but as proven for weeks now, it is not the sole Shiloh Shepherd registry. Also, while mentioning that Barber seperated "her" Shiloh Kennels GSD from the AKC, the article fails to mention in doing so a new Rare Breed was accepted and recognized. Further, this New Breed was not just formed due to Barber seperating her GSD's from AKC, there was the addition of other breeds that are not GSD's , thus they no longer could be registered with the AKC as GSD's.
Further, the statement of each registry having thier own vision is not true. Every registry is and has been breeding to the Shiloh Shepherd Breed Standard that was given freely to everyone up until the last year or so. Even though now Barber wants to claim ownership to the standard, it is still the tool everyone has been using, thus, the claim each has thier own vision for the future of the breed is very misleading.
The article as written now is fair and balanced and as Jareth said it fits other dog project sites and has my vote as being accepted.
ShenandoahShilohs
-----
Patti,
Please correct me if I am wrong:
* Aren't these dogs named after the kennel of origin - Shiloh Shepherds?
* Wasn't the ISSR, started in 1991, the governing body for these dogs?
* Isn't the only other breed added by way of a dog that was a GSD/Malamute mix. But isn't it also true that not ALL dogs that left the AKC in 1990 had this dog in its genetics.  
The suggested history section does not say that the ISSR is the sole Shiloh registry, it states that in 1991 the ISSR was created to be the governing body for the dogs, which is true.
The suggested history section states (without going into specific details) that in 1990 these dogs were separated from the AKC, which is true.
The suggested history section states that other registries/clubs have been formed, which is true. If the phrase "each having their own vision for the future of the breed" is not accurate in your opinion, then it can be removed.
How does this sound?
The Shiloh Shepherd was developed by breed founder Tina Barber of Shiloh Shepherds Kennel in New York state in a sustained effort over the last third of the 20th century. Her goal was to preserve the type of German Shepherd she remembered as a child in Germany. Those dogs were big, mentally sound, and beautiful. In 1990, these re-created dogs were separated from the AKC and in 1991 the International Shiloh Shepherd Registry (ISSR) (based on Von Stephanitz's SV) was established to be the official governing body for the breed.
As the breed gained recognition and popularity near the turn of the millenium, new registries and clubs began to form.
In the External Links section of the article is listed all the registries/clubs 
I know you have strong personal feelings and so do many others.  Can we please work together to create an article that can be acceptable to all parties involved?SandraSS 23:48, 2 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Article content 

message: Ms Barber has made many changes to the "History" of the Shiloh Shepherd in recent years, thus the claim of the ISSR being based on the SV. In fact with all the mention of the ISSR on her website, I only found the mention of being "based on the SV" in one newer article.
HOGWASH!!! based on is not the same as duplicated!!  please view my full reply!  Tina M. Barber 14:52, 4 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Tina, honestly the constant attacks on the other registries and editors are getting you nowhere. You've been asked repeatedly to stop; please find a way to discuss the issue without resorting to threats. .:.Jareth.:. babelfish 16:03, 4 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  POV??? 

message: I take great umbrage in the comparison of the ISSR to the SV. Here are some of the basic SV rules"
Basic SV breed requirements
Inbreeding of 2-2 or closer (breedings between litter mates or to their parents or grand parents) are not permitted.
IT'S NOT PERMITTED IN THE ISSR EITHER!!  ACTUALLY, WE TAKE IT A STEP FURTHER AND INSIST ON LOW RC VALUES, TO AVOID OVER INBREEDING!! http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inbreeding
 Granted, the *breed* was established via inbreeding during the 70's  & 80's but that IS how foundations are set!!!  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Selective_breeding#Selective_Breeding_Methods
WE NOW USE http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Selective_breeding#Crossbreeding_and_backbreeding ONLY, AS PER THE NB CRITERIA, AND THUS FAR ONLY 2 DOGS (IN 17 YEARS) HAVE BEEN EXCEPTED!!!   Tina M. Barber 17:26, 4 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  SV v. ISSR 

message: VERY SIMPLE MATRIX
History of each "registry"
http://www.shilohshepherds.com/buyersBeware/registryComparisonMatrix1.htm
Breeder Requirements
http://www.shilohshepherds.com/buyersBeware/registryComparisonMatrix2.htm
MORE DETAILS 
http://www.shilohshepherds.com/buyersBeware/registyComparisons.htm
Tina M. Barber 18:23, 4 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  JUST FACTS 

message: PLEASE READ 
Purebred dogs
In the hobby of dog fancy, the word 'purebred' causes controversy, largely because of unresolved differences of opinion over what constitutes a breed.
In general, there are two types of purebred: those 'recognized' by a kennel club and those of independent breed clubs.
Kennel clubs usually have strict sets of criteria for the recognition of a new or existing dog breed, normally with some period of developmental or provisional status. It cannot be assumed that the date of recognition of a breed indicates how long the breed has existed as a pure breed.
FOR MORE DATA, GO TO http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Purebred
THEN PLEASE TAKE A MOMENT TO CLICK ON  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kennel_club
THEN IF YOU ARE STILL UNSURE .. PLEASE READ 
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dog_breed   Tina M. Barber 22:07, 4 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  The WIKI has your answers!!! 

message: Jareth: In good faith, taking into consideration the ISSR's proposals for the "History" section of this article, while at the same time ensuring fair, unbiased representation for all registries/clubs affiliated with the Shiloh Shepherd, please see below what contributors to this discussion (representing the NSBR, TSSR, SSBA, and ISSDC) have unanimously agreed upon as a Proposal for the History section of the Wikipedia Shiloh Shepherd Dog article.  They request that you initiate a Straw Poll to seek discussion and consensus from all contributors (including "independent" contributors (i.e. Elf and Trysha), in order that this part of the article may be finalized.  
Proposed:
(start)During the mid-1970’s, Tina Barber, of Shiloh Shepherd Kennel in New York State, began developing a unique line of German Shepherd Dogs.  Her goal was to preserve the type of German Shepherd Dog she remembered as a child in Germany; dogs who are good family companions, exceptionally intelligent, mentally sound, big and beautiful, and similar to Chuck Eisenmann’s “Hobo” dogs.
Following the introduction of a non-German Shepherd into the breeding program, these dogs were separated from the AKC.  In 1990, recognition for this rare breed was granted and it was formally named the "Shiloh Shepherd" after its kennel of origin.  Soon after, the first Shiloh Shepherd registry, International Shiloh Shepherd Registry (ISSR) was formed, and an official Shiloh Shepherd Breed Standard was written.
 
As the breed grew in popularity, additional registries were formed which adhere to the original Shiloh Shepherd Breed Standard.  These are: the National Shiloh Breeders Registry (NSBR), The Shiloh Shepherd Registry (TSSR), and the Shiloh Shepherd Breed Association (SSBA).
 
There are two Shiloh Shepherd Dog Clubs: the Shiloh Shepherd Dog Club of America (SSDCA), which is affiliated with the ISSR, and the International Shiloh Shepherd Dog Club (ISSDC), which is affiliated with the NSBR, TSSR, and the SSBA.
Additional information about this breed can be found in several all-breed publications, websites, and books.  The Shiloh Shepherd has grown in number and popularity and it continues to be embraced by rare breed organizations and dog fanciers alike.(end)
69.173.135.114 22:10, 4 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Attn: Jareth - NSBR, TSSR, SSBA, and ISSDC History Section Proposal

message: Proposed:
 
(start)During the mid-1970’s, Tina Barber, of Shiloh Shepherd Kennel in New York State, began developing a unique line of German Shepherd Dogs.  Her goal was to preserve the type of German Shepherd Dog she remembered as a child in Germany; dogs who are good family companions, exceptionally intelligent, mentally sound, big and beautiful, and similar to Chuck Eisenmann’s “Hobo” dogs.
 
SORRY, BUT THE SHILOHS DON'T *LOOK* ANYTHING LIKE THE HOBO DOGS .. THEY JUST HAVE THE SAME TYPE OF *INTELLIGENCE* YOU MAY WANT TO COMPARE PICTURES!
 
Following the introduction of a non-German Shepherd into the breeding program, these dogs were separated from the AKC.  In 1990, recognition for this rare breed was granted BY WHOM & FOR WHAT??? and it was formally named the "Shiloh Shepherd" after its kennel of origin.  Soon after, the first Shiloh Shepherd registry, International Shiloh Shepherd Registry (ISSR) was formed, and an official Shiloh Shepherd Breed Standard was written.
 
As the breed grew in popularity, additional registries were formed which adhere to the original Shiloh Shepherd Breed Standard.  These are: the National Shiloh Breeders Registry (NSBR), The Shiloh Shepherd Registry (TSSR), and the Shiloh Shepherd Breed Association (SSBA).
 
NO DATES??  I THINK THAT IS A VERY IMPORTANT FACT!!  THIS IS NOT POV ... THE SHILOH WAS STARTED IN 1974, RECOGNIZED BY ARBA FOR SHOW PURPOSES IN LATE 1991, AND THE "OTHER" REGISTRIES (THAT ARE BEING LISTED) DIDN'T START TILL 2002?
 
There are two Shiloh Shepherd Dog Clubs: the Shiloh Shepherd Dog Club of America (SSDCA), which is affiliated with the ISSR, and the International Shiloh Shepherd Dog Club (ISSDC), which is affiliated with the NSBR, TSSR, and the SSBA.
 
NOT ACCEPTABLE!!  IT SOUNDS LIKE THEY ARE EQUAL! THE SSDCA STARTED IN 1991, THE *NEW* ONE JUST STARTED IN 2004!!
 
Additional information about this breed can be found in several all-breed publications, websites, and books.  The Shiloh Shepherd has grown in number and popularity and it continues to be embraced by rare breed organizations and dog fanciers alike.(end)
 
69.173.135.114 22:10, 4 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  My reply to *your* proposal! 

message: again ms barbar fails to make any attempt to reach resolution in this article.  the editor appears to have no grasp on the wiki concept, the no pov concept, the no original research concept and fails to respond to any valid posts without some attempt at discrediting the parties involved (and for some reason always thinks that capitialization and excessive use of the exclamation point helps prove her points).
how long should editors like this should be allowed to continue to hold up the development of the article.
the question was raised about sources that will help validate the non-issr registries.  the link provided by an editor demostrated that one of the largest rare breed associations (rarities inc) not only confirms their recognition (rules quoted) but helped illustrate a sampling of numbers and their successes of these non issr shilohs while be measured against the same breed standard.  instead of providing a decent response, editor barbar states again it's a money scam (this is a common position for her as can be seen in past posts).  i am sure she would state the same about arba, nkc and the other rare breed associations that observe the clubs, registries, and dogs for what they are - valid.
someone with time on their hands should count the number of self referencing links, excessive use of capitals, and constant exclamation points used by editor barbar since the beginning of this article.
and on her numbers claim, i think this was previously discussed.  recently an editor questioned why there were 2427 issr shilohs listed on the site in jan 2001 and 4000 in jan 2005 - no response was given.  an increase of 1573 in 4 years, yet the editors own link states about 150 issr puppies are born per year.  the math would appear wrong (not that it is even valid here and the entire number is not relevant in the article at all).  
the tccp is simply a residence in texas when the data is entered into a home made database.  this is good, but does not make it any better or any worse than any other registry tracking pedigrees.  one could say the nsbr data is tracked at the canine data tracking institute in pennsylvania.
the editor continues to use negative terms such as "the other registries are in constant conflict" but the only conflict seen here is being created by the editor in question.  the users from the non-issr have been heads and users of the non-issr registries and seem to be getting along just fine.
a great deal of work and discussion has taken place here with many of the parties closing on a collective article, but it appears that one single user will not allow this to happen (even though they've been negative, banned, and uncooperative)
with the constant use of links by the editor without any reasoning it is very hard to understand what possible debate the editor is trying to make.  links (external, verifiable, etc) should be used to refernce and support a statement made in a discussion not thrown about leaving other editors to try and find what the editor is trying to say.
the only question remaining is how long will this editor be allowed to stop any progress in this article.  i guess we can only hope that this is the editors last involvement here.  Gwyllgi 02:07, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  response to editor barbar 

message: Ms. Barber said: "MY REPLY TO EACH ITEM IN QUESTION IS IN CAPS, IN ORDER TO PREVENT CONFUSION".
Ms. Barber, rather than constantly using uppercase (caps, as you refer to them), perhaps you could just indent your replies by using the colon (:) function. By preceding your statement witha a colon it will indent it under the post to which you are referring. (:The ISSR is a.....)
Also, could you please refrain from your constant overuse of exclamation points (!!!!!!) and question marks (???????).  It's okay to use multiples once in a while, but we really can hear you when you just use one.  By using them so dramatically, it appears you are trying to shove your views down our throats, rather than justify your position(s) through logic, calmness, respect, reasonableness and good-faith.  It's just not polite and the group has made it clear they do not appreciate the behavior.
Now, may we resume concentrating on the three History Section Proposals on the table? 69.173.135.114 03:34, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Talk Page etiquette

message: Jareth made the below comments:
Actually you've brought up a good point. Right now the only sources we have for the article are third-party and of increasingly dubious credibility. Perhaps this applies (from WP:V): 
:Obscure topics
 
:Subjects that have never been written about by third-party published sources, or that have only been written about in sources of dubious credibility should not be included in Wikipedia. One of the reasons for this policy is the difficulty of verifying the information. As there are no reputable sources available, it would require original research, and Wikipedia is not a place to publish original research. Insistence on verifiability is often sufficient to exclude such articles. 
This would seem to suggest that the article might need to be seriously edited since the only source we currently have is the ARBA website which lists the breed standards. .:.Jareth.:. babelfish 17:41, 4 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Alright, let me see if I can help out with some third party sources.  I'll be updating the article to include the references shortly. , , , , , , ,  And by the way, noone said that her information on the history of the breed and its development are in question, she would be considered the expert in that area.  This concerns her portrayal of the other registries.  It appears that Tina has carried on this campaign on more than just Wikipedia  .:.Jareth.:. babelfish 15:12, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Please note that the only information that is currently considered questionable is the information she provides about the other breed registries.  Lets not get so melodramatic. Please see my above post. .:.Jareth.:. babelfish 15:21, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Another Option - Remove the article from Wikipedia 

message: How sad but typical.If the ISSR/SSDCA groups can not control everything as they do on their fully moderated, spoon fed e-groups, and self written web pages they want it to all go away. Well there are third party articles out there, not everything should come from Ms Barber as through out time she has proven to be extremely hostile to anyone not giving her their blind devotion. We have all seen her recent post to her e-group trying to get her "supporters" to come here. Yes we have seen her posts which are not asking people to come and share their opinions, rather sending just a link to the disagree section of the straw poll section and telling them what to say. For over a week there have been like 7 posts virtually begging the readers to come here and only say they support all of her points. She has referred to these discussions as "war" rather than an adult discussion trying to come to a mutual agreement. It is a real shame how some poeple when not receiving their way resort to attacks, and call it a war. That is not how mature adults solve a disagreement.  
For years now the non ISSR folks have been on the receiving end of vicious lies and threats. For the record, no matter how hard some may wish it, we are not going away, we just keep getting stronger.   The bullying, threats and attacks used can no longer be accepted.
This article should not just "go away" because Ms Barber can not get her own way. The Non ISSR group here has been very accommodating to most points of this article raised by Ms Barber. What will not happen is the acceptence of her attempts to write an article where she is diminishing the other groups with her falsehoods and negative connotations.    
ShenandoahShilohs
:I am in total agreement with the following statement..."If information provided by Tina Barber (the acknowledged developer of these dogs) about the Shiloh Shepherd's origin, development, and history are not included, documented historical reports from original registry are not deemed as factual, and Shiloh registries and clubs are not put into proper context then I agree that the article should be removed completely. "
:gp —the preceding unsigned comment is by 152.163.100.132 (talk • contribs) 
I agree with SandraSS and Trillhill that the Shiloh Shepherd articles should be removed from Wikipedia. Obviously if information provided by the actual and only documented and recognized founder and continuing developer of the Shiloh Shepherd, Tina Barber, is not included and recognized as documented fact then the articles as they currently read are confusing and misleading to the public. It is sad that people who could be a welcome part of the true Shiloh Shepherd family which is ISSR/SSDCA seem simply unable or unwilling to follow the already established guidelines and rules carefully prescribed for the benefit of each dog in the continuing development of the true Shiloh Shepherd. The ISSR/SSDCA rules and regulations are strict and exact with true concern for the integrity of the Shiloh Shepherd in mind. The people who appear to find the need to attack Tina Barber seem to be the same people who are unwilling to follow the rules as prescribed and then they set out to form new groups/registries to fit their own needs. Tina Barber is extremely generous with her time and knowledge with sincere people who are truly committed to the welfare of the Shiloh Shepherd as a developing breed. Her records of years of careful development of the Shiloh Shepherd are documented and are available proof. I have said before that I suppose anyone who has a mind to do so can set out to develope a  new breed of dog, cat or whatever, but then they should not try to call it a Shiloh Shepherd because it simply won't be a true Shiloh Shepherd at all.
Nancy Tisci, TiAmo Desert Mountain Shilohs in AZ. —the preceding unsigned comment is by 69.139.220.205 (talk • contribs) 
At this point, removing the article altogether is the best option(IMO).
michelle johnson 1-5-06 —the preceding unsigned comment is by 66.21.156.244 (talk • contribs) 
---I agree with ShenandoahShilohs.  Reasons for removing this legitimate article are baloney"  Miles 18:49, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I urge that the article be kept.  Surely, this group of adults can reach a constructive compromise that benefits Shilohs and the public. S Scott 21:24, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Article removal 

message: I think many contributors are well aware that Ms. Barber has made several appeals outside this forum, in her chat group, for members to come to this talk forum and "vote" for her position, saying they don't even need to post, just sign and say they agree with her points. 
Considering this, and completely in agreement with Ms. Barber's constant assertions that we "always investigate before you invest" and "knowledge is power" (i.e. before simply signing "I agree"), I must therefore ask:
:"Have you researched what positions and arguments are being put forth in this discussion on the Shiloh Shepherd Dog Talk pages, prior to voting?
:Have you read ALL the posts/information contained in these Talk pages and in other resources (other than just Ms. Barber's own writings here and on her website), before deciding your position?
:Have you fairly and thoroughly researched both "sides" of this debate before reaching your conclusions? 
The contributors representing the NSBR, TSSR, SSBA registries and the ISSDC club (the "slivers" as Ms. Barber refers to them) genuinely appreciate and anticipate your  participation in this discussion.  It is an opportunity for the free, open, respectful, logical dialogue/debate without censure, of "all" sides of the Shiloh Shepherd story, involving all participants in the Shiloh Shepherd breed. The more parties involved, the more informed we can all become and this can only be for the betterment of this breed...it's "all good".
Regardless of what you may have been told otherwise, many contributors to this discussion are responsible, caring individuals, and they respect, and feel no animosity towards you or the informed choices you make (i.e which Shiloh registry/club with which you choose to participate). Your choices, questions, views and opinions are valid, they DO matter and they are always welcomed.
It is for these reasons that
:these contributors have continued to strongly assert that:
::YOU DO have the right to make respectful and logical contributions to these Talk pages and form/pose YOUR own opinions, based on YOUR own research, based on YOUR right to freely question and discuss, based on FAIR and EQUAL presentation of all points of view, without "any" registry/club wanting you to do nothing more than just blindly say you agree with their points and sign your name.  For if anyone were to ask this of you, it would clearly demonstrate a total lack of regard and respect for YOUR own intelligence and YOUR own ability to hear it all and then come to YOUR own conclusions.
:::AND
:these contributors ask ONLY that YOU:
::Thoroughly "investigate" this entire discussion and expand your "knowledge" of the issues contained herein by reading completely through this Talk Page and its archives (which has been ongoing the past two months), ASK QUESTIONS, consider ALL points raised by both sides in this debate, research ALL sources of information (ISSR, NSBR, TSSR, SSBA) and then make up your OWN minds.
At that point, if you are comfortable becoming/remaining affiliated with the ISSR/SSDCA...your decision will be respected and accepted.  If you wish to become affiliated with the NSBR, TSSR, SSBA...you will be welcomed respectfully by them.  Most importantly, the choice will have truly been yours to make, having had ALL information available to you, to assist you in your decisions.
Contributors here are not "terrified" of Ms. Barber; they welcome the opportunity to debate with her in a forum where their voices cannot be controlled or censored. Contributors here do not wish for Ms. Barber to be "blocked" from participating in this discussion; they just want her to treat them with common courtesy and respect, to engage in dialogue and not simply lecture them, to reply to their questions/concerns, to apply logic and provide verification for her claims/positions. In fact, although she may have told you otherwise, Ms. Barber has never been blocked because of her views; she has only been blocked when she has been inapproprate, insulting or made threats to other contributors - feel free to confirm this through Wiki's block log:   http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Log/block and/or with Jareth, our Moderator. Contributors here are not from the "dark side"; they too genuinely and responsibly love their Shilohs Shepherds and care about their future.  Contributors here are not trying to "push" their issues/agenda; they are simply fighting for everyone's right to be heard and to be able to find the information they need in order to make their own decisions.
It is precisely for all of OUR RIGHTS (including YOURS), to freedom of speech and freedom of information, that many contributors are here "fighting" for in this "war"(as Ms. Barber has chosen to call it). 
For, if you support silencing questioning/opposing voices today (in this article)what happens if you start asking questions or become the opposition tomorrow? Miles 18:20, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Some Questions/Comments re: "...Remove the article..."