Talk:Boxer (dog breed)/Archive 2

message: I´ve discovered on http://www.americanboxerclub.org/boxer_history.html the lineage of the branch that resulted in Piccolo von Argentor. I´ll have to update the graph to reflect this, but I haven´t the time to do this yet. Did you think it´s best for the article to update the text only after updating the graph? Or some transient inconsistency is bearable? To summarize his lineage is:
* Alt's Flora II (not on graph) is sister to Alt´s Schecken .
* Alt´s Flora II mated with her father Lechner´s Box to produce Maier´s Lord (the first notable boxer sire)
* Maier´s Boxer was mated with Maier´s Flora of unknown parentage which produced Piccolo von Angertor
Regards Loudenvier 20:30, 10 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Piccolo von Angertor lineage 

message: We could incorporate a gallery of sorts with boxer pictures at the end of the article. I think that as a guideline the picture to be elligible for the gallery will have to come from Wikipedia Commons. This way it will not be only a gallery for vanity, but a gallery with images contributed to the public domain on the Wikipedia commons server which makes it possible to be used easyly in any other wikipedia in any other language. Of course, this gallery would have a limit imposed by common sense, but since I can't make sense of its preferable size right now I will not suggest any. Regards Loudenvier 14:21, 2 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I have started the gallery with a few nice pictures, including the nice pet that didn't make into the article itself. Please, do not add further pictures to the article unless they bring some new information along (a good picture of a white boxer is desperately needed...). Also add only images to the gallery that are from wikimedia commons, this will help reducing the amount of duplicate files among wikipedia projects. Try to include only high quality images on the gallery. Remember: When you upload an image it will go to the public domain and anything could be done with it after that. If you don't feel confortable with that, then do not upload an image. This gallery will hopefully help protected the undesired growth of pictures inside the article, rendering it unreadable. Regards. Loudenvier 03:23, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Gallery and guidelines 

message: I think its clear that the boxer, given his physical characteristics, was used as a fight dog. Many sources state that, but they aren't reliable enough for me to use them to back up the fighting dog "dark" side of the history of the breed. I think its politically incorrect to try to hide this fact. In light of present day Boxer temperament its unnecessary and perhaps derogatory trying to deny any aspect of the breed history. I think the fact here is that we need to make clear that while Boxers were used as fight dogs in the past, they weren't bred for fighting (in contrast with Staffordshire Bull Terrier), so they are not fighting dogs, only physically capable dogs that were used on dog fights. Some links to read:   . But let me make something clear: I am totally against dog fights. If I know of someone who practices it, I would take the Sh#t out of him and take him to the police. Regards Loudenvier 14:19, 5 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Boxer as fight dogs 

message: This article needs some neutrality cleanup.  Read through the sections on demeanor and tell me that's unbiased.  Only positive facts are mentioned about the dog's demeanor and uses.
:If by "demeanor" you mean the section entitled "Temperament", I suggest you read past the opening paragraph.  There is quite a bit of information on the potential negative aspects of Boxer temperament: a strong personality; a challenge for a first-time dog owner; "headstrong"; a very long puppyhood and adolescence; high energy; needs socialization to tolerate other dogs well; a sometimes over-protective, territorial and dominating attitude; can be dominant with larger dogs of the same sex; poorly bred or trained dog is capable of seriously injuring or killing other animals. 
:Newcastle 16:19, 19 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  And most important: I guess he never owned a Boxer... :-) Just kidding. This article really isn't POV, it doesn't even takes a lot of good sense to realize that. It's also fully referenced, citing lots of sources. I would even say that this article is a little detrimental to the breed when it comes to the health problems that seems to be a litle exacerbated, and also tell of some general dog problems as if they are exclusive or more common on this breed. Regards. 14:57, 22 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Neutrality 

message: I've recently reverted an edit that changed those information because they were wrong. Alleged increased deafness rate in whites are still controversial, not unbiased studies surfaced so far that claiming whites to be MUCH MORE PRONE is going too far. 35 kg is far too much for weight, 32 kg is the accepted maximum (70 pounds =~ 32 kg). Loudenvier 16:41, 25 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  height, weight and deafness 

message: The gallery is obviously becoming full of unencyclopedic images which probably make loading the page an absolute nightmare for people without highspeed internet. I propose removing these images which I feel do not help to illustrate boxers in any way not addressed by the text and/or other images and are therefore unnecessary and unencyclopedic.
Image:IMG 1222.JPG
Image:Nava 4 months old.jpg
Image:Cone-head Reni - dog in Elizabethan collar.jpg
Image:Spirit 002.jpg
Image:JeffDaphne.jpg
Image:JeffDaphne2.jpg
Image:280158884 259977798a.jpg
Image:Playfulboxer.jpg|Possibly
I'm sure this will be met with resistance, but galleries shouldn't be a free-for-all of whoever wants to see their dog online. --Pharaoh Hound (talk) 13:26, 26 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: There's a compromise here. The gallery exists for some time and it didn't expanded too far. Even without high-speed its impact is very low because its at the end of the article, and in a separate table (just see the mark-up generated). This means it will be rendered after the actual article, which in turn will not impact low speed connections. I agree it's not straight-forward encyclopedic, but it helps to illustrate the boxers in day-to-day life without making the article itself unreadable. And there's also a good side-effect to that: the images submitted are automatically into the public-domain, and this is a great by-product because now we have a few good boxer pictures that we could use anywhere without fear of copyright violation. Also, the pictures submitted to the commons can be shared without duplication across wikipedia projects... We could let the gallery grow and in a periodic basis we could clean it, keeping the best photos and those which shows unique moments: for example, there isn't a single picture recent-born puppets or really old boxers, nor competition photos, etc. Loudenvier 17:00, 26 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, if we need/want photos of very young Boxers I just uploaded two pictures of four-day-old fawn puppies nursing and sleeping to the commons if anyone feels like putting them up here. Additionally, I've uploaded on of the few good photos of Boxers standing that show the whole dog and has decent lighting here, and a "pack" of Boxers here (including a white, fawns and a brindle). I may also upload this photo of a fawn puppy and/or this white six-month-old. I'm i the process of looking through the 1,373 phots that match the Flickr search for CC licensed that match the keyword "boxer". --Pharaoh Hound (talk) 23:16, 29 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  Amazing photos! I will update the article with the ones that add new info to the article. Loudenvier 15:16, 6 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Gallery is becoming excessive 

message: Do we really need to plagiarize to describe their temper? 
The character of the Boxer is of the greatest importance and demands the most careful attention. He is renowned for his great love and faithfulness to his master and household, his alertness, and fearless courage as a defender and protector. The Boxer is docile but distrustful of strangers. He is bright and friendly in play but brave and determined when roused. His intelligence and willing tractability, his modesty, and cleanliness make him a highly desirable family dog and cheerful companion. He is the soul of honesty and loyalty. He is never false or treacherous even in his old age.[12]
 
Sure, it is referenced, but I am sure their is a better way to write it without plagiarizing 
Hereis the original work.
--K8TEK 18:33, 13 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Do you want to speed delete this article because of this alleged copy-vio? Give me a break. Tke your time to review the article history and all effort put on it and tell me that its a copy-vio article, ok? By the way, you have to use proper tags for copy-vio. If you think any copy-vio exists, be accurate in pointing it out and do not use a tag that marks the entire article as copy-vio. The aforementioned quote is just that, a proper referenced quote, which is allowed into wikipedia and is not a copy-vio. Regards Loudenvier 20:35, 13 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  In fact, this article is one of the best referenced articles I have ever found in wikipedia. Loudenvier 20:37, 13 February 2007 (UTC)

text:  The original copy-vio tag was clearly intended as a disrupting vandalism. The page at worldwideboxers.com  is very different from this article. The last copy-vio brought by K8TEK is about a quotation from Gwen Bailey book which is perfectly accepted in wikipedia and is not a copy-vio itself. No need to alter it. The "original work" from the Australian Kennel Club is the one that is violating copyright by not citing its source (the Gwen book).  Loudenvier 20:42, 13 February 2007 (UTC)

text: Are you so sure? The Copy-vio tag that was put in the article simply states that the article qualifies for speed deletion, so that was what I was asking you about... Do you want to speed delete this article? No, of course not! So do not put this tag again because that's what this tag will do to the article: qualify it for speed deletion. You should have read the implications of using such drastic means to bring a concern about sources... Regards. Loudenvier 17:43, 15 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Tempermant 

message: I removed the two photos bc...
1). The puppy picture had a color already shown. Also, one cutesy puppy picture is enough for a couple-paragraph section. 
2). Nursing puppies does not actually clarify the passage about the inherited disorders of Boxers. 
: It wasn't meant to clarify the passage, but it has much to do with health. Loudenvier 21:24, 3 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I really support re-adding the picture (1). This picture is historical. It exists since the first versions of this article (even before I started working on it :-). If a picture was to be removed then it should be the other, not this. By the way its the most aestheticly good-looking picture on the entire article and good pictures are very hard to find. Also I do not found a clearly shown fawn-white boxer on the article that could make this picture redundant. Even if the puppy picture is present, a full grown fawn male picture is still missing, and fawn-flashy boxers are the trademark of the breed!  Loudenvier 21:31, 3 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  If my memory does not fail me this picture was even used in the breed box to illustrate the breed a few years ago. Loudenvier 21:37, 3 May 2007 (UTC)

text: I don't think this is "such an small article". This dog article is one of the best dog articles I ever stumbled upon in wikipedia.  It's concise though, which is good. We (active editors of this page) always strive to keep a low-ratio of pictures, and I really do not think that 7 pictures are much of a burden at all. This is wikipedia, not an ordinary encyclopedia, and we aren't running out of disk space! What strike me most is that I was the one removing all "silly pet pictures" from this article for a few years and then, suddenly, every single pet picture is deemed a silly pet picture by the wikiproject dog, which did not helped writing a single line of this article and even rated it just a B-class article... compare it to the Pug article, which is GA-rated :-). I think this is a deleterious behavior to simply remove all those pictures. (I can't believe I'm now advocating the keeping of pictures rather than the removal :-) Wikipedia is another kind of media. Pictures help attract readers and illustrate the articles. We also need to strive for picture quality. We need to find better pictures and substitute the current ones. That's what the wikiproject dog should be doing. Besides the gallery (which was an attempt to free the body of the article from "too many silly pet pictures"), there was never an overuse of pictures in this article. Regards Loudenvier 14:49, 4 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: You're overreacting to the cleanup, and falling prey to the "I'm a regular editor of this article, how dare you come in and mess with MY article" syndrome. Not every picture is a silly pet picture and even some that are, such as the silly-looking bat dog A-frame one, stay because they are useful and relevant. And I'm not arguing that the images need to be deleted because of structural issues/ space needs in Wikipedia as a whole, I'm saying that excessive cutesy pictures that serve no good purpose (it is not needed to have a picture of every single color of boxer)) need to go because they crowd things and more importantly, decrease the encyclopedic credibility of Wikipedia by making it look like a boxer breed fansite written by/for pet owners. Furthermore, as far as comprehensiveness of coverage goes, this article is very small when compared to other pet articles. Check out Guinea pig, there is at least as much content/history about the Boxer breed as this small rodent. The Boxer article is very far from GA status, much less good and concise. VanTucky 17:19, 4 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I think you didn't get my point(s)... But, anyway, I still think this article rates better than the Pug (to compare to only one instance). And this isn't "my article" and I don't need patronizing about that. It's an article that I really care about, and I always discuss changes, if you take your time to read the long discussion on the talk archive about the breed name you would notice that. Credibility in wikipedia came from citing sources mainly and this article cites lots of sources (could improve though). I myself almost never introduce any information without a reliable source to back it up. I also think that a picture of each boxer color would be great, mainly side by side, since this is encyclopedic (just like the progenitors pictures). Which pictures serves a good-purpose is a subjective matter, that's why I would hesitate before removing... Instead of labeling this article far from good and small a few suggestions would be greatly welcome, contributions even more.  Loudenvier 19:47, 4 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Re-removal of certain images 

message: I'm putting back English Bulldog instead of Bulldog since there are more than on "Bulldog" breed and outside UK the "bulldog" is known as English Bulldog. In Brazil, for example, the correct breed name is "Buldogue Inglês" (English Bulldog). Even the bulldog article itself makes this clear in the opening. There's no point confusing the boxer article: the boxer was breed to the English Bulldog, if we keep only bulldog then it could have been the French Bulldog, the Old Enlgish Bulldog, etc. For the sake of clearness I will maintain the English prepended to bulldog. We can discuss it here in the talk further. If there is consensus to the contrary I will gladly step aside. Loudenvier 14:18, 9 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Nice reasoning and strong arguments. What can I possibly reply to you? The sources I've used to create/trace the breed origins, mostly printed books about Boxers, they all used the "colloquial" term English Bulldog. One of those books are from England. That's why I defended the use of English Bulldog instead of Bulldog. But since there's a "policy" to use the name of the breed as employed in the country of origin, despite not being the most commonly applied term, this, by itself corroborates your position. Thanx for the enlightenment. Loudenvier 15:23, 11 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I moved the whole Molosser statement to the Breed History section to be more consistent with other breed articles. Also, since "English Bulldog" is not appropriate, neither is "German Bullenbeisser" since that is not the name of the breed - instead, I've put that the Boxer was developed in Germany, from the Bullenbeisser and using Bulldogs from England (which were different at the time than Bulldogs from, for example, Spain); I also noted the direct ancestry of the smaller Bullenbeisser developed in Brabant in Belgium.  Hopefully that will clarify the origin of the different ancestors and keep the naming conventions intact!  Newcastle 20:06, 13 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Hi, I have put back more info on the lead to make this compliant with WP:LEAD. I think that the other breed articles should also expand a little their leads. Loudenvier 19:32, 26 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  English Bulldog 

message: I´ve discovered on http://www.americanboxerclub.org/boxer_history.html the lineage of the branch that resulted in Piccolo von Argentor. I´ll have to update the graph to reflect this, but I haven´t the time to do this yet. Did you think it´s best for the article to update the text only after updating the graph? Or some transient inconsistency is bearable? To summarize his lineage is:
* Alt's Flora II (not on graph) is sister to Alt´s Schecken .
* Alt´s Flora II mated with her father Lechner´s Box to produce Maier´s Lord (the first notable boxer sire)
* Maier´s Boxer was mated with Maier´s Flora of unknown parentage which produced Piccolo von Angertor
Regards Loudenvier 20:30, 10 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm currently working on creating another, more complete genealogy graph incorporating these changes and will update the article's text and graph when ready. Loudenvier 16:55, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

text: I think it would be fine to update the article now and upgrade the image afterwards. AnmaFinotera 17:00, 6 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Piccolo von Angertor lineage 

message: To help in the process of expanding and improving the article, I thought it might be good to have a link to the dog breed style guideline here for easier referencing to help figure out what work is needed: Wikipedia:WikiProject_Dog_breeds#Recommended_article_structure.  AnmaFinotera 17:05, 6 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't see the point in putting the History section after appearance and temperament, but... I will yield to consensus Loudenvier 17:41, 6 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't know for sure, but that seems to be common in a lot of style guides.  In medical articles, for example, history is also one of the last sections. My rough guess is that is intended to be what was considered to be the order of importance on the topic.  For dog breeds, while we might find the history fascinating, most folks probably want to read about appearance, temperament, etc first :) AnmaFinotera 17:46, 6 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: You're probably right. It seems that the most "wished for" information should come first. But it's not how an ordinary encyclopedia would approach the layout of articles, but wikipedia is not ordinary, it's extraordinary. Loudenvier 18:38, 6 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: So true :)  Part of the uniqueness that is Wikipedia ;) AnmaFinotera 18:49, 6 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I have reorganized the article according to the recommended structure, I did also remove some pictures and added others, now the article has very few pictures, but all very pertinent... I'll expanding a few sections soon and then we'll have space for more pictures, as we wait for other editors to vote on those that we should keep and those we should keep removed :-). Loudenvier 14:22, 7 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Looking nice, though may want to add labels to the two new pics. ;) AnmaFinotera 16:09, 7 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Article Improvements 

message: :Edit: I have added two new user boxes for Boxers :-). I have also organized them in the table bellow, including the already existing user box. Just use it if you find them nice Loudenvier 17:12, 14 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Userbox anyone? 

message: *keep: visual diagram of Boxer's early genealogy with the early boxers shown. Helps visualizing the convoluted genealogy of the first boxers Loudenvier 14:34, 6 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Early genealogy 

message: *keep: Rare picture; historical milestone of the very first boxers in the very first show with boxers. Loudenvier 14:34, 6 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Boxers in the first show 

message: *keep: Rare picture showing the early boxers depicted in the genealogy chart. Very important to help in the visualization of how different the early boxers were from the current breed standard (there's a copyvio claim, but it's a work published prior to 1928 for which copyright expired, so it'll probably be "fixed" soon). Loudenvier 14:34, 6 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, it was a compilation I've made... I should have the source floating around on my HD, with all layers so that changing the name will be straightforward. If I don't find the source, I'll have to make the edit right over the flat image, but it can be done with not much effort :-) Loudenvier 17:15, 14 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Early boxers 

message: *keep: image fits their section well and highlight something UNIQUE about the topic :-) Loudenvier 16:39, 6 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Boxer puppy ears tapped 

message: thumb|150px|none|Fawn male at nearly 5 years.
*remove: bad angle, not that representative of the breed, coloring not well discernible. Loudenvier 16:45, 6 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Fawn 5 year old boxer 

message: none|thumb|A brindle male at 18 months
*keep: high-quality brindle-flashy boxer picture. Perhaps it can be used as a source for a picture with all colors represented, which would eliminate the need for many other pictures, including the white boxer!  Loudenvier 16:57, 6 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: And this is also an amazingly good-looking specimen!!! :-)Loudenvier 18:49, 6 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Brindle male boxer 

message: *keep: high-quality puppy picture depicting the most immediately recognizable Boxer color: fawn-flashy. There are no other puppy pictures in the article Loudenvier 16:43, 6 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Fawn flashy puppy 

message: *keep better of the two and illustrates a rarer color variety
*keep idem (but, again, it can be used as a frame in a single picture depicting the all color varieties...) Loudenvier 18:39, 6 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  White boxer 

message: thumb|none|White male at 4 years.
*remove: redundant, the other white picture is or greater quality Loudenvier 16:42, 6 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Another white boxer 

message: *Remove: not a very good image (I honestly thought it was a corgi variety from the angle :P) and isn't particularly necessary for the section; maybe a better image would work better
Is this a better replacement? This picture captures a very powerful moment of a boxer doing agility:
:Yes, I think that would be better.  It illustrates boxers in agility as well as the signature boxer grin :) AnmaFinotera 19:08, 6 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Boxer dog in agility show 

message: Sometimes this can be a heated topic, so I thought I'd mention it here before making any sweeping changes.  In most of the article, the breed name is capitalized.  In some spots, and in some of the image captions, it is not capitalized.  I have always felt that, since it is a proper name, it should be capitalized; but I know there are those who only capitalize the portion of dog names that refer to people or places - Doberman pinscher, Labrador retriever, etc.  
The Wiki dog breeds page capitalizes all parts of a breed name, so I would expect this article should follow that convention - but given recent events, I no longer feel it is safe to act on that expectation.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.107.12.18 (talk) 16:45, 7 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Of course it's safe!!! And you stand correct... The problem with the pictures was that it was controversial, but, in the end, was for the good, don't you think? :-) Go on, capitalize it (in fact, if you don't do it yourself, I'll do it myself :-) ) Wikipedia encourages us to be bold, to edit without pity, but, then, when controversy arises we should Talk (that's why there is a talk page for each article). We just don't need edit warring, which is the single most detrimental behavior in wikipedia. Loudenvier 17:20, 7 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, but the last time I was bold about editing without pity I was accused of vandalism and being a sockpuppet.  Far better to discuss first, at least for a time, in my eyes. :)  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.107.12.18 (talk) 17:44, 7 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Why don't you register? Anonymous contributions are encouraged, but without an account you are not able to "watch" pages, and lack many tools to work as a community. And you also can get a nice nick name just like mine :-) :-) :-) Loudenvier 18:00, 8 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I am registered, Wiki just never cookies me and I quite often forget to re-log in every time. :)  I remembered today, though! ;) Newcastle 18:29, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

text: Most of the sources I've seen on dog breeds capitalize Boxer as well, so I think its safe to make it a standard that the name be capitalized in the article. AnmaFinotera 05:12, 9 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Capitalization 

message: I have added a self-made (based on a wikimedia drawing) pictures with the proportions for the Boxer... I'm planning in extending the Appearance section, so I think it will not be a extraneous picture at all. Loudenvier 18:18, 8 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Oh, good - I was just looking at that Appearance section and thinking it needs quite a bit added, but I'm tied up with work today and a show the next three so wasn't ready to tackle it just yet.  Glad you are! :)  Newcastle 18:32, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

text: Nice picture!  That is an excellent image to have there! AnmaFinotera 19:13, 8 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Proportion picture... 

message: Hi,
This page uses the term bitch to refer to female domestic dogs. In an attempt to form consensus and standardize the use of the term across the set of wikipedia pages that refer to domestic dogs, I've proposed changing the term bitch to female in cases where bitch provides no additional information, and is not the commonly accepted term.  Breeding may be an exception; amongst breeders, bitch may be the norm, in which case its use here is justified.  Either way, if you have an opinion, please visit Talk:Dog#Use of the term bitch and join the debate.
--Thesoxlost (talk) 19:41, 18 November 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Use of the term bitch 

message: Here. Worth a mention? --220.255.7.235 (talk) 11:09, 11 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Added this to the section discussing cropping and docking:
"There is a line of naturally short-tailed (bobtail) Boxers that was developed in the United Kingdom in anticipation of a tail docking ban there; after several generations of controlled breeding, these dogs were accepted in the Kennel Club (UK) registry in 1998, and today representatives of the bobtail line can be found in many countries around the world. "  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.107.12.18 (talk) 18:43, 26 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Natural bobtail 

message: I personally feel that the links to clubs currently extant in the External Links section violates the guideline that Wikipedia is not a list of external links; as can currently be seen, there are already 16 such links. Veinor (talk to me) 15:49, 24 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I understand your concern but given the length of the article, and the fact that the external links have been restricted to only national parent clubs for the breed, I don't feel the list is excessive.  Each national parent club offers different information and viewpoints on various issues in the breed, and so fall within the Wikipedia External Links guidelines.  Newcastle (talk)  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.107.12.18 (talk) 18:30, 26 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Links to clubs 

message: The boxer was definately _NOT_ developed in America.. It was developed in Germany and then later in America and United Kingdom aswell as a few other European Countrys. 
I have edited this to suit, anybody disagree?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Kremsel (talk • contribs) 23:05, 18 January 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I have changed it back to just Germany.  Boxers weren't especially popular in America and other countries until after the First World War, when soldiers returning from Germany brought the dogs home with them.  By that time, however, Boxers were well-established as a breed with a closed stud book.  Newcastle (talk) 19:01, 19 January 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Where the Boxer was developed. 

message: The later part of this article (after the health section is an un-formatted mess. Will someone please help organize it. 71.112.23.3 (talk) 11:02, 2 February 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I removed that text since it was just a redundant copy of the article.Coaster1983 (talk) 15:23, 2 February 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Help, cleanup request 

message: It would be nice if someone could give advice for sunburned white boxers to reduce sunburns. Sikko999 (talk) 23:38, 22 February 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sunburned white boxer 

message: Whoever changed the training section from "motivational" to "learning theory" obviously doesn't realize that positive punishment and aversives are part of learning theory.
Jerking a dog around with a choke chain like a barbarian is still utilizing learning theory - it's just punishment-based learning. Good training technique - no, not in my humble opinion. However, it is still based on learning theory - the part of operant conditioning which states that organisms will work to avoid punishment.
Learning theory is not something that is or is not applied - it is an inherent way of acquiring behavior. Whether or not the trainer is aware of that is not relevant - it is still the mechanism by which organisms obtain or change behavior.
Changing it back to something more educated and less blatantly biased - and I'm a very positive trainer, so let's all keep that in mind, please.
:And I'm both a positive trainer and fairly well-educated, so let's keep that in mind, too.
:The difficulty with your terminology is that "positive" training does quite often use punishment - negative punishment, to be sure, but punishment all the same.  As well, many trainers use leash corrections but call them "motivational pops", so "motivational" doesn't clearly convey the type of training about which I'm sure you're writing.  I do think that most people will understand "corrections" in the context of dog training more easily than they will "punishment".
:The terms "operant conditioning" and "behaviorism" also include the concepts of positive punishment, aversives, and negative reinforcement, just as "learning theory" does.  The correct way to state it would be "training based on positive reinforcement, negative punishment, and extinction" but that's cumbersome, which is why it was originally just "positive reinforcement such as clicker training" with the link to explain more (for those who care) about the Quandrants of OC and how they're used in clicker training.  (After all, this isn't a training article.)
:As a compromise, I've left your "punishment-based" (just fixed the typo), since then both "corrections" and "punishment" are included, and removed both "motivational" and "scientific/learning theory", substituting "reward-based".   Newcastle (talk) 17:37, 9 March 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Learning Theory" 

message: i was just wondering how some boxers can be a little taller with a slightly more protruded muzzle
my boxer - buster - is a 4 1/2 yr old male brindle
the vet says his weight should be 89lbs
does this sound right  ?
he is very muscular and as i said has longer legs and a little taller than most boxers
i have akc papers on him as a pure bred
his mother and father are shorter with the wider shorter muzzle
mom is a fawn and dad a brindle
please advise
99.139.47.222 (talk) 21:40, 16 March 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: There are variations among individuals in the breed, especially if the breeder is not strictly paying attention to the standard.  The Boxer's muzzle, for example, is far different from the natural canine muzzle, so it is often a 'fight' against nature to keep it at the shorter-than-normal length.  The standards describe a dog that would weigh about 65-70 lbs. at adult weight (a male) but again, there are variations.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.33.247.169 (talk) 00:02, 29 October 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  weight 

message: The word American needs to be capitalized.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.94.91.58 (talk) 01:17, 9 October 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  American Boxer 

message: An image used in this article, File:Brindle cd.jpg, has been nominated for speedy deletion for the following reason: All Wikipedia files with unknown copyright status 
;What should I do?
Don't panic; you should have time to contest the deletion (although please review deletion guidelines before doing so). The best way to contest this form of deletion is by posting on the image talk page.
* If the image is non-free then you may need to provide a fair use rationale
* If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale, then it cannot be uploaded or used.
* If the image has already been deleted you may want to try Deletion Review
This notification is provided by a Bot --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 18:19, 2 September 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  File:Brindle cd.jpg Nominated for speedy Deletion 

message: I'd like information about the boxer genome project. The most recent that I've been able to find (so far) dates back to about 2006. Has there been any progress since Tasha's complete genome was sequenced? Have biologists been able to isolate a gene that causes epilepsy or diabetes? Thanks.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.184.8.131 (talk) 19:07, 7 November 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: I haven't heard of any isolation of genes for epilepsy or diabetes. Many genes have been found since the canine genome was mapped; for Boxers specifically the gene for DM and one gene involved with ARVC have been identified, although further research is necessary for both. Information on the canine genome project is available at the Broad Institute's website, http://www.broadinstitute.org/mammals/dog  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.128.83.122 (talk) 21:57, 29 December 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Tasha: Boxer Genome Project 

message: The size specifications for this dog keep being edited upwards (making them seem larger than they on average are). I know dogs vary, but surely the best policy is to adhere to Kennel Club and American Kennel Club breed standards? Please advise, for I am rather new and slightly frustrated at this.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gerryjtierney (talk • contribs) 22:35, 3 January 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: You're quite right, it's vandalism that occurs unfortunately all too frequently. Size in breed articles needs to be cited to some source, be it the standards or a book of some type. Miyagawa (talk) 23:16, 3 January 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: It could be that people try to pass dogs like American Bull dogs off as boxers and need to adjust the weight to prove to a landlord that its a boxer.Mantion (talk) 07:47, 17 May 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Size/weight unjustified editing 

message: Substituted at 20:16, 2 May 2016 (UTC)
thread_title: Assessment comment

message: This is what AKC ( American breed standard says) : Color: The colors are fawn and brindle. Fawn shades vary from light tan to mahogany. The brindle ranges from sparse but clearly defined black stripes on a fawn background to such a heavy concentration of black striping that the essential fawn background color barely, although clearly, shows through (which may create the appearance of reverse brindling). White markings, if present, should be of such distribution as to enhance the dog's appearance, but may not exceed one-third of the entire coat. They are not desirable on the flanks or on the back of the torso proper. On the face, white may replace part of the otherwise essential black mask, and may extend in an upward path between the eyes, but it must not be excessive, so as to detract from true Boxer expression. The absence of white markings, the so-called "plain" fawn or brindle, is perfectly acceptable, and should not be penalized in any consideration of color. Disqualifications Boxers that are any color other than fawn or brindle. Boxers with a total of white markings exceeding one-third of the entire coat. Somebody put no more that 4 pictures with all white boxers in the article, and one in the lead. Hafspajen (talk) 20:47, 29 November 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  AKC 

message: Should the infobox picture be changed to show the breed as it would look in standard competitions, since it is a show dog. I know alot of people have problems with cropping the ears or docking the tails, and I have five boxers, all which have docked tails, but I never had their ears cropped. So I understand, but still... I guess I'm just trying to see if there was discussion or any consensus on what to do.Worldjustice (talk) 01:34, 18 September 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: In some parts of the world, Boxers are shown uncropped and undocked. :) So either is appropriate, really.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.128.83.122 (talk) 17:54, 18 September 2012 (UTC)

text: The FCI breed standard, which applies to the country of origin (Germany), does not allow cropped ears or docked tails.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.128.83.122 (talk) 17:55, 9 October 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Infobox picture 

message: We update our articles with better pictures all the time. Just because a picture has been in an article for years is not a good enough reason to still keep it. A picture in an  article has to be ecyclopedic, it has to have an encyclopedic value. Just a pet that someone likes, that is not a good enough reason. Hafspajen (talk) 17:46, 29 June 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Picture 

message: Is=  22½ to 25 inches.(57-63 cm) Females: 21 to 23½ inches 53-59 cm. Change back if changed. Hafspajen (talk) 18:47, 25 December 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Heights 

message: This article currently has upwards of 20 pictures but is only a medium-sized article at best. I have a hunch that a bunch of boxer owners decided to take pictures of their pups and upload them, but Wikipedia is not a picture book/photo gallery. I highly suggest we trim down/cut back on all the image usage. Just to throw something out there, I suggest we keep only one picture for each type of boxer (fawn, brindled, white), and also keep the pictures that concern the dog breed's history (there are a few historical pictures). The purpose of images in an article should be to serve encyclopedic value and to accompany and aid text where it would be appropriate. Before I take any action, though, I'd like to get the input of others. Thanks, Jacedc (talk) 17:42, 7 May 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: I won't raise any objections ... sadly, pet pics are a problem in dog breed articles generally. SagaciousPhil - Chat 17:51, 7 May 2015 (UTC)
replies: text:  I would expect as much. People love their pets. Anyway, I'm starting a project here. For anyone who wants to help, please feel free (although if your contributions are not attributable to a reliable source and/or contain original research, it will be removed). My goal with the project is to update the article in the ways that it needs (there are some dead links, outdated links, etc.), improve the quality of sources (I don't think the American Boxer Club is reliable, for example), try to elaborate upon/expand the prose a bit, and address the image issue. Right now I'm just in the stage of gathering sources, though. Thanks! Jacedc (talk) 14:52, 8 May 2015 (UTC)

text:  On a sidenote, is there something about the American Boxer Club that makes it reliable that I'm missing? I'd appreciate more input on this. Thanks, Jacedc (talk) 14:52, 8 May 2015 (UTC)
replies: text:  , breed clubs that are recognised by the major established registration institutions, The Kennel Club and the American Kennel Club, are usually suitable as reliable sources. The American Boxer Club is listed as the parent breed club by the AKC so is acceptable. SagaciousPhil - Chat 08:07, 9 May 2015 (UTC)
replies: text:  Oh really? Okay, great. Thanks for the info. :) Jacedc (talk) 11:55, 9 May 2015 (UTC)
replies: text:  For anyone else interested/concerned, Sagaciousphil is correct. The American Boxer Club is recognized as a reliable source here and here. Jacedc (talk) 19:56, 11 May 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Do we really need all the pictures? 

message: 71.201.14.65 (talk) 00:23, 2 September 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: In order to do that you will have to upload the photo to Wikimedia Commons first. Please feel free to do so. White Arabian Filly Neigh 00:52, 2 September 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Semi-protected edit request on 2 September 2016