Talk:Shiloh Shepherd dog

message: I'm afraid I have to quick fail this GA nomination, due to lack of citations throughout.  There seems to be a single inline citation, and one reference to an external site.  Additionally, the lead should be extended, per WP:LEAD.  Until the references are sorted though, no full review has been done. Carre 20:25, 14 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Quite. An article, to be GA-class especially, must verify information with reliable sources and attribute particular facts to particular sources through citations (either in footnote or Harvard reference format). VanTucky Talk 20:43, 14 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Actually, if you review the References section, you can see that many different reference materials were used, the citations simply aren't inline. Shell babelfish 18:45, 28 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, I was aware of that. However, if you read the GA criteria, inline citations are expressly required. If you don't attribute particular facts to sources through inline cites, then the reference material is nearly worthless. Leaving it up to the reader to hunt down what source verifies what fact is not GA-class work. VanTucky talk 19:04, 28 November 2007 (UTC)

text: Good work, but are Shilohs frowned upon or disqualified in regular Shepherd circles like whites are? For the sake of NPOV, I think the relation between Shiloh breeders/enthusiasts and the mainstream Shepherd community needs to be dealt with more. VanTucky talk 22:17, 28 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  GA Fail 

message: None of the reference links are live.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.15.65.19 (talk) 06:42, 25 February 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Very frustrating 

message: I have a Shiloh from a certified breeder. We chose not to breed her (as one of her ears flopped over). She is a white Shiloh Shepherd. I will photograph her, upload the image, and make the image public domain, and link to it from the page. Unless, of course, a Shiloh breeder objects to a white Shiloh image in which case they can make their own image available. SunSw0rd (talk) 20:39, 12 October 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Lack of Photo 

message: Just wondering why it is necessary to state OFA statistics on this article when no other dog breed article seems to make that reference.  Also, the comparison to GSDs throughout the article is confusing as the Shiloh Shepherd is a different breed altogether, so what is the relevance?  The King Shepherd article has none of these references so why does this one?
Gremlyn (talk) 23:28, 27 April 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, that statement likely came about because the article incorrectly stated the opposite in the lead.  As for the comparisons, they are probably there because the breed came from German Shepherd stock.  See similar comparisons in Cockapoo for example.  Breeds that are farther removed may only mention their ancestor breeds in the history section rather than give comparisons elsewhere. I don't feel strongly about it remaining though, but I did put back in the reference to OFA that Smcmac removed; it's important that material in the article be verifiable so citations should remain even when the wording is improved. Shell   babelfish 10:19, 30 April 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Thank you for your consideration.  Linking to the general OFA stats seems fair. Gremlyn (talk) 13:20, 5 June 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  OFA stats 

message: :Shiloh Shepherd dog →  – All of the sources call the breed “Shiloh Shepherd”, not “Shiloh Shepherd dog”. Cavalryman (talk) 11:26, 3 March 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: Withdrawing proposal as redundant due to merger. Cavalryman (talk) 10:28, 14 March 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Requested move 3 March 2020