Talk:Herdwick

message: I am glad to report that this article nomination for good article status has been promoted. This is how the article, as of October 21, 2007, compares against the  six good article criteria:
:1. Well written?: Very well written, prose was engaging and kept me interested.  I only wish it was a bit longer, but that's just me.
:2. Factually accurate?: Article is very accurate and consistent with the source material.
:3. Broad in coverage?: Article gave a thorough evaluation of the subject, a bit short but well within GA parameters.  I learned a few things from reading it.
:4. Neutral point of view?: Yes.
:5. Article stability? No evidence of any edit warring or vandalism.
:6. Images?: Images were perfect,
If you feel that this review is in error, feel free to take it to Good article reassessment. Thank you to all of the editors who worked hard to bring it to this status, and congratulations. 
— Mike Searson 13:48, 2 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Successful [[Wikipedia:Good articles|good article]] nomination

message: On re-reading the "early history" section I am still unhappy with it (see discussion above).
Firstly, while the National Geographic is of course a reputable publication, it is not academic, and it is not a reliable reference for this material, because it does not give its own sources.  Reputable publications are regarded as being reliable sources because they can be relied on to check their sources: either the National Geographic had sources, or it didn't.  If there are indeed proper sources which support the material, let's have them.  If they do not exist, then the National Geographic cannot have used them.  Either way, the NG itself is not a good ref for the material. 
Secondly, even the National Geographic is only reporting folklore.  If we do accept it as a ref, it is only one for the existence of the folklore, not for the origination theories themselves.  (In any case, it's not really the existence of the theories which is in dispute, just whether they are likely to be true.)  So the section certainly needs to be re-worded so it reports folklore rather than offering the theories themselves.
Thirdly, both exotic-origin theories are simply implausible, and would require other (far more reliable and comprehensive) sources to be ignored.  Herdwicks bear virtually no resemblance to either Norse or Spanish sheep.  Like many British breeds they are white-faced, long-tailed sheep, and this type is generally thought to have been brought to the British Isles by the Romans, before which time all sheep in north-western Europe were short-tailed, multi-coloured sheep like the modern Shetland, North Ronaldsay, Icelandic etc.  It's surely most likely that the Herdwick (like many West Country and Welsh breeds) is a survivor of the English Roman type, which was replaced in most of the northern English uplands by the more recent black-faced, long-tailed "heath sheep" (such as the Swaledale and Scottish Blackface).
What I suggest is that the section is rewritten along the following lines:
*Description of English white-faced sheep origin, with refs (which I can find).
*Mention of exotic-origin folklore theories, with proper refs for the folklore.
Richard New Forest (talk) 11:26, 5 December 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Origin again 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to  on Herdwick. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add  after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add  to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20120205071354/http://www.herdwick-sheep.com/herdwick_news.html to http://www.herdwick-sheep.com/herdwick_news.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 10:30, 7 January 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to  on Herdwick. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add  after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add  to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
*Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20071028102254/http://www.herdwick-sheep.com:80/ to http://www.herdwick-sheep.com
*Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20120204073024/http://www.herdwick-sheep.com/herdwicks.html to http://www.herdwick-sheep.com/herdwicks.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 13:53, 28 February 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified  on Herdwick. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120204073024/http://www.herdwick-sheep.com/herdwicks.html to http://www.herdwick-sheep.com/herdwicks.html
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.lake-district.gov.uk/index/understanding/posters/poster2_farming.htm
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 15:37, 10 November 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Lug marks have have not been replaced by ear tags, which can fall out or be removed by thieves. There was an extended discussion of lug marks by James Rebanks, author of The Shepherd's Life, on his twitter account @herdyshepherd1 a couple months ago. BTW, the quote about 100,000 visitors and one gate left open that seems to be attributed to Bill Bryson here is actually from Rebanks.  KC 22:30, 8 June 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Lug marks 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Herdwick. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20071017020658/http://www.nationaltrust.org.uk/main/w-chl/w-countryside_environment/w-food_farming/w-food_farming-hill_farmers/w-food_farming-herdwick_carpets.htm to http://www.nationaltrust.org.uk/main/w-chl/w-countryside_environment/w-food_farming/w-food_farming-hill_farmers/w-food_farming-herdwick_carpets.htm
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 21:38, 2 November 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified