Talk:Fjord horse

message: On seeing the "dead link" tag for Albrough, Lori. "The Colors of the Norwegian Fjordhorse"  Web page, accessed August 12, 2007 at , I pared the url back to the parent site (http://www.nfhr.com), from where you can access the sub-pages, including colours from the About the breed link. I couldn't see any author named Lori Albrough though, so you may want to change that. However, I leave you to amend the reference as you see fit. At least you can take care of the dead-link bizzo. Cheers Wotnow (talk) 09:01, 20 January 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks for the heads up, but don't just change the link because that falsifies the source, either just leave it tagged or try to actually find replacement material, OK? I'll find something.  Some new articles there, even more interesting than before... Sponenberg has weighed in there, he's a leading color geneticist. Montanabw(talk) 04:04, 21 January 2010 (UTC)
replies: text:  Cheers. I see you took care of the dead-link bizzo. I figured you'd probably get there more readily than me because you have some familiarity with the topic and material. Looking at the above pages, I could easily see that I could construct a direct correlation between the sentence "all Fjord horses are dun", and an updated citation. The About the breed link for example appears to allow that extrapolation, stating 90% are dun, and then describing the remaining 10% as dun variations. A bit like a 'dun-deal', one might say (okay, I did say it). The previous link to the same site was from 2007, and despite any updates, and even though we (or at least I) don't know what the 2007 site text said, we know this particular set of facts (dun colouration) remains broadly, ah, stable. The author bit wasn't critical. If visible author, then cite, else, don't - that sort of thing. The main difference then appears to be the change from htm to php format, which would have made for the dead link. Nevertheless, I figured one of the editors more familiar with the article and source material would prefer to make the change, because you could simultaneously consider any other changes you thought worthwhile. Regards Wotnow (talk) 05:43, 22 January 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: No problem, but let me clarify your comments above: It is believed that today, 100% of modern Fjords are dun!  90% of Fjords are "brown dun"  (i.e. what the rest of us call "bay dun" or "classic" dun or "zebra dun", and the most common form of dun in all breeds) and the other 10% are other kinds of dun -- ALL are dun, the variations are caused by different underlying base coat colors bay, black and chestnut, (see dun gene for the details), plus Fjords also picked up a cream dilution somewhere too, hence the "yellow" and "white" duns.   Sponenberg article on the Fjord registry site backs this, though he says it indirectly, a wise caveat, as 100% is probably impossible to prove unless you genetically tested every single horse for color (and the the only dun gene test currently available only is used for Quarter horses and even that one is still in development), there may be a heterozygote or two out there who might meet up someday and make fools of everyone, just like it is rare but not impossible for a chestnut Friesian horse to occasionally pop up.)   Equine coat color genetics is absolutely fascinating, and then when the Fjord folks turn all the terminology used by everyone else on its head, it just makes for too much fun (an odd sort of fun, but fun). Montanabw(talk) 05:58, 23 January 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Cheers. Indeed, I would have thought that it is impossible not to conclude that 100% Fjords are dun from the following sentences: "approximately 90% of all Fjord Horses are brown dun in color. The other 10% are either red dun, gray, white or "uls" dun, or yellow dun." For this reason, I have added the appropriate citation to the opening statement in the Color section, as it is more direct than the existing citation. I did not remove the existing one, as I think they are complementary. One citation states in no uncertain terms that all Fjord horses are dun or dun variations, justifying the opening statement, while the other provides photographic descriptions for the reader's benefit. Wotnow (talk) 22:07, 25 January 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Works for me.  Given that we had some source misread the same and claim some Fjords are brown, I have decided that there is no such thing as footnote overkill in wiki-land!  Montanabw(talk) 00:57, 26 January 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Ref bizzos

message: The flavour of English for this particular article was clearly established with . Per WP:ENGVAR, I'll make changes and tag accordingly. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 08:52, 17 October 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: Um, that's kind of silly:  " norvegian "  Really?  You want ENGVAR to sound like the chef?  Seriously, if we are going to get along now, let's not get too wound up here.  I did a crapload of work on this article (several years ago, yes) to figure out all the stuff about the weird color naming and such.  If there is a significant Fjord horse presence in the UK, we can certainly discuss if UK English is more suitable, and I'm not going to edit war over the issue, but given the popularity of the breed in the USA I don't see any reason not to reach a consensus to use US English, (we can always do that) given that the breed is Norwegian, making the native language issue moot ;-) .  Montanabw(talk) 21:12, 19 October 2014 (UTC)
thread_title: Engvar

message: JLAN, any interest in getting this article to GA status?  It actually should be pretty easy, given that we have a lot of sources.  Montanabw(talk) 21:17, 19 October 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  GA? 

message: The article has to be overworked. https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Fjord_horse&oldid=1124158444 | https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Fjord_horse&oldid=1124211706 . The infobox had better information, before the last edits. That pictures have better qualities. Before having some editwar, you should accept the better pictures and the better infobox. eG. Fjordhorse is correcter then Fjord, because that stands for some water only! 91.184.164.227 (talk) 21:55, 27 November 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Article Structure, and pictures have to be replanned!