Talk:Purebred

message: Um...okay...so we've added cats...do we need to give equal time to horses et. al.?
Should this become a disambig. page and the dog portion moved to a new page, or should the cat portion be expanded here?
Quill 08:11, 27 Sep 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: Purebred is a very Generic (and confusing) term.  It is usually found in conjucntion with cats and dogs, however, it is so generic that perhaps a dsambig page should be made and info directed to Pedigreed Dog, Pedigreed Cat, and whatever the best term for horses is...(i don't know I don't do horses).  There is a request for Pedigee (dog) and I made Pedigree (cat) but as a note of semantics, a pedigree is a pedigree and the more appropriate page title is probably Pedigreed Dog and Pedigreed Cat. 
Pschemp 13:48, 27 Sep 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, I would bet money that fanciers of other animals that 'show' use the terms 'purebred' and 'pedigree' as well, so we'll have to do something. Quill 23:03, 27 Sep 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: I'd like to see this be an article that discusses the concept of purebred in general terms and includes sections addressing purebred in some specific instances, such as in dogs and cats.  I don't know that, at the moment, we need separate articles.  Elf | Talk 01:20, 28 Sep 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: Sigh.  Elf proven to be right...again....Just noticed that there was pedigree (dog) and pedigree (cat) saying the exact same thing.  Two years on, there's not enough for two separate articles.  I've created pedigree (animal) and it does not mess up any article that links to pedigree (dog).  Having trouble with the REDIRECT, though--Elf, can you check and fix?  Thanks.  Quill 04:25, 6 June 2006 (UTC)

text: just wondering if people are really just going to search on the word purebred.  I think it is more likely that they would look for purebred dog, pedigreed dog, purebred cat etc...so if it remains one page it is going to need a lot of redirects to be useful. Pschemp 01:29, 28 Sep 2004 (UTC)

text: I think redirects in this case are fine. I'm not completely convinced that there's enough here to warrant a completely separate article for dogs that can't (or shouldn't) be covered  under dog breed.  IMHO. Maybe should be the same for cat breed.  Elf | Talk 01:37, 28 Sep 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Generic terms

message: "Random bred" is suggested as an antonym by the Monks of New Skete. Many wikipedia articles seem to use the phrase already, for both cats and dogs. Elijah 18:14, 2004 Nov 22 (UTC)
:Yup, this one should also probably be noted here and in mixed-breed dog and other places.  Elf | Talk 23:04, 22 Nov 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Antonym

message: I've flagged these examples of former, now invalid subspecies names as :
*F. catus anura - the Manx
*F. catus siamensis - the Siamese
*F. catus cartusenensis - the Chartreux
*F. catus angorensis - the Turkish Angora
I can find no evidence these weren't just made up for this article.  Try this Google search, which uses text from this article to eliminate re-published WP content in the search results:
"F. catus anura" -wikipedia -"some of these cat breeds are"
No meaningful results at all, just a single page of useless results like chat forums and other junk.  Spelling it out as "Felis catus anura" produces more results, but not of any better quality - mostly discussion boards and endlessly reposted "articles" with no sources. 
I have a sneaking suspicion that this is simply hoax material, and that it appears anywhere at all only because Wikpedia said it and others have run with it.   There are other signs this is fake.  For one thing, "cartusenensis" should probably be "cartusiensis" and "angorensis" should be "ancyrensis"; these names appear to have been just made up by someone with little background in Latin, as a joke.  And -ensis names in binomial nomenclature indicate actual places of wild-stock origin, which does not apply in the case of the Chartreux, the connections of which to the Chartreuse region are only legendary.  Similarly, "siamensis" wouldn't be used, since Latin had no name for Thailand, and the New Latin used for binomials would use a latinization of the modern name, thus probably taiensis. 
If someone can't provide a source, I'm going to delete that whole mess as nonsense. — SMcCandlish   Talk⇒ ʕ(Õلō)ˀ  Contribs. 20:03, 18 November 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: It was added in this edit.(found via wikiblame) You can ask the user where he got the info. I don't think he is a hoaxer. --Dodo bird (talk) 22:28, 18 November 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: I have no issues with deletion, but in defense of whoever added it, there was once a thing amongst other animal purebred breeds to claim certain older breeds with roots in antiquity to be separate subspecies, I know of it with horses.  So just because it has been disproven by modern science doesn't mean it was a hoax, just something that has been debunked, sort of like the geocentric theory of the solar system.  That said, I have no objection if you toss it.  Montanabw(talk) 22:49, 18 November 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Dubious 

message: I flagged the following statement as dubious after noticing that it contradicts the previous paragraph (preceding section), as well as the opening. After following up, everything I came across pointed to 'pedigree' needing written documentation, while finding no consensus on a purebred needing it. I don't know anything about the subject, but after reading two consecutive paragraphs that were seemingly contradictory, I thought I'd point it out. I'd appreciate any advice regarding my edit. Especially whether the use of  was correct. Or if I completely misunderstood the content.
:(Statement, 13:00, March 29, 2014‎)
*"A purebred dog is a dog of a modern breed of dog, with written documentation showing the individual purebred dog's descent from its breeds' foundation stock[dubious]."
:(Preceding paragraph, 13:00, March 29, 2014‎)
*Sometimes the word purebred is used synonymously with pedigreed, but purebred refers to the animal having a known ancestry, and pedigree refers to the written record of breeding. Not all purebred animals have their lineage in written form. For example, until the 20th century, the Bedouin people of the Arabian peninsula only recorded the ancestry of their Arabian horses via an oral tradition, supported by the swearing of religiously based oaths as to the asil or "pure" breeding of the animal. Conversely, some animals may have a recorded pedigree or even a registry, but not be considered "purebred". Today the modern Anglo-Arabian horse, a cross of Thoroughbred and Arabian bloodlines, is considered such a case
:(Opening paragraph, 13:00, March 29, 2014‎)
*Purebreds, also called purebreeds, are cultivated varieties or cultivars of an animal species, achieved through the process of selective breeding. When the lineage of a purebred animal is recorded, that animal is said to be pedigreed.
Chinchilla513 (talk) 18:06, 30 July 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: How does the 'statement' contradict the 'preceding paragraph' and the 'opening paragraph'? Hyacinth (talk) 00:14, 5 October 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  dubious? 

message: TBH, I don't see why this topic is different from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/True_breeding_organism  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rebelpino (talk • contribs) 16:30, 8 September 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: It's not a different topic. "True-breeding organism" is a WP:OR exercise in trying to generalize from artificial selection of domesticants, to natural biology. It should just be redirected to Purebred#True breeding, unless anything in it is worth merging in first (it has a citation that might be usable here since this article is short on plant-related material, plus a dictionary definition that might be helpful for disambiguating, but is otherwise unsourced). It's confusing the general biological topic of homozygosity with selective purebreeding.  Other terms should also redirect here, like breed true, breeding true, true breeding, etc.  I'm not sure about true to type; need to see whether that is used in multiple ways.  Anyway, I fixed the missing hyphen in the title of that stub, and put a merge tag on it.  — SMcCandlish ☺ ☏ ¢ ≽ʌⱷ҅ᴥⱷʌ≼  01:10, 12 September 2016 (UTC)

text: Oppose merge; breeding true is an important concept in plant biology, particularly for the propagation of apples and other fruit trees. I've adding something on these to the True-breeding organism page.Klbrain (talk) 14:15, 27 April 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: Whether the concept is important isn't in question; the rationale for having two articles on the same concept is.  — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼  03:15, 24 June 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merging from True-breeding organism 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified  on Purebred. 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/20080514154230/http://jobfunctions.bnet.com:80/abstract.aspx?docid=118654 to http://jobfunctions.bnet.com/abstract.aspx?docid=118654
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) 03:42, 11 November 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hi, one area worth a mention is honeybees. Bees are a biologically complex organisms for humans to breed and establish a pedigree owing to their sex determination system, but the Buckfast bee is one well known breed of bee. Honeybees would shine a light on the concept more generally. 124.169.136.60 (talk) 12:41, 12 August 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  One could include honeybees bees in list 

message: What is a full-blooded American 173.249.128.34 (talk) 08:24, 15 October 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  What is a full-blooded American?