Talk:Scottish Blackface

message: A reference has been challenged by User:HighKing. Here is an extract from the referenced webite "We have been breeding top quality Scottish Blackface sheep since 1990. Our appreciation for this breed comes from first-hand experience working with them in Scotland. We are members of the Scottish Blackface Breeders Association and all of our stock can be registered." I don't think you'll find a person or an organisation more qualified to talk about the subject, and thus be a reference. MidnightBlue (Talk) 18:21, 9 October 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Reference 

message: Hi, is there a reliable reference for stating that the scottish Blackface is the most "important" breed in the British Isles?  There doesn't appear to be any statistics on the Irish Dept of Agriculture website, and no references have been provided since I requested last May.  --HighKing (talk) 18:22, 9 October 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Hi, contrary to your opinion, Wikipedia is very clear on the fact that all claims must be supported by a verifiable reference.  So if someone wants to claim that the Scottish Blackface is the most important breed in the British Isles, then if challenged, they must back it up.  I placed a citation required tag on this fact last May - nothing showed up in the meantime.  I've checked official compilations of stats on the Irish government websites and I can't find any census counts on sheep in Ireland.  The reference you've provided fails because it is self-published - and from what I've seen from searching, this "fact" appears to be oft-repeated, almost like an urban myth.  I've removing the claim until a reference can be provided.  --HighKing (talk) 12:22, 10 October 2008 (UTC)

text: (move response)The reference provided  refers to the Blackface Sheep Breeders Association as being the provider of the information.  The Blackface Sheep Breeders Association main website states that the breed is the most numerous in Britain, which is what this article states.  Why would you prefer to use a reference which incorrectly quotes it's source?  --HighKing (talk) 17:16, 13 September 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Well maybe they used it as a source then corrected it. There was previously a reference of virtually the same quality as the one to which you refer, stating British Isles, which you rejected as being "self published" or not meeting verifiability standards. Until you can find a reference as I described above the British Isles is acceptable here. MidnightBlue (Talk) 17:24, 13 September 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: The "previous" self-published reference is for Braeburn Farm, a farm with a website (and what an absolutely ridiculous domain name btw).  So to be clear, you believe that a promotional farm website, one which is set up to promote and sell the farm, is a better and more reliable reference than the official breeders association?  --HighKing (talk) 20:33, 13 September 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: The Shepherd's Journal website states "Thank you to the Scottish Blackface Sheep Breeders' Association for providing us with this information". It does not state that the information was obtained from their website. The Breeders website is superficial and does not include anything like the detail found on the Shepherd's Journal; it is the equivalent of a glossy brochure. Clearly the breeders have more detailed information at their disposal and apparently it is this information which they have supplied to the Journal. The very first line states that the breed is the most numerous in the British Isles. It couldn't be more explicit. MidnightBlue (Talk) 22:22, 13 September 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: So you're saying that the Breeders Association website gives different information than some other detailed information available from them, and it was this different information that was passed on to the Shepherd's Journal who faithfully reproduced it.  Even though, on the website, they've quoted the fact the info came from a 2003 survey.  I think I'll take the simpler and more likely explanation that the Shepherd's Journal screwed up.  --HighKing (talk) 22:47, 13 September 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I shouldn't think they screwed up, but no matter, our views on this are not relevant. The Journal has more detailed information that the Breeders website and the Journal makes the BI statement. It's an open and shut case. MidnightBlue (Talk) 22:59, 13 September 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: The journal admits they take their information from the Breeders website.  The Breeders website cites it's source as a 2003 survey.  They have also in the past updated their website as newer statistics become available (as in 2007 when this update was made).  You say that the Shepherd's Journal has more detailed information?  Really?  Where?  The website you pointed to is a hosted website, not even a specific domain name, so we've no idea who put that information there, or their credentials (The Shepherds Journal ceased publication in Dec 2008). The reference just doesn't meet the minimal standards set by WP:V.  --HighKing (talk) 00:00, 14 September 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: If we need to find another reference, so be it. But it's a known fact (even among those outside the country, such as myself) that this is the most common breed in the UK. I don't see it as something worth arguing that much about. Steven Walling 07:26, 14 September 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't have a problem with stating that it's the most common breed in the UK.  But there's nothing to indicate it's the most common breed in the British Isles (which is not the same thing as the UK).  --HighKing (talk) 11:32, 14 September 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: That sounds fine with me. It gets the factual point across to readers sufficiently. Steven Walling 23:50, 14 September 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Reference required 

message: I suggest that the various sheep breeds also be added to the category of fibers:wool. Detailed fiber information is relevant to the use of the breed and its fleece. Ariadia (talk) 16:13, 27 March 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Wool

message: "Scottish Highland Sheep" should be set to redirect here. I don't know how to do that myself, but hopefully someone else can. 66.25.254.123 (talk) 19:49, 1 June 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Redirection 

message: An image used in this article, File:Scottish Blackface Sheep yowes1.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
To take part in any discussion, or to review a more detailed deletion rationale please visit the relevant image page (File:Scottish Blackface Sheep yowes1.jpg)
This is Bot placed notification, another user has nominated/tagged the image --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 05:52, 20 March 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: File:Scottish Blackface Sheep yowes1.jpg Nominated for speedy Deletion

message: Prior content in this article duplicated one or more previously published sources. The material was copied from: https://web.archive.org/web/20061229183234/https://www.ramshornstudio.com/shearing.htm, https://web.archive.org/web/20061229184736/https://www.ramshornstudio.com/blackface_breeders_guild.htm, https://web.archive.org/web/20060510134353/http://ansi.okstate.edu/breeds/sheep/scottishblackface/. Copied or closely paraphrased material has been rewritten or removed and must not be restored, unless it is duly released under a compatible license. (For more information, please see "using copyrighted works from others" if you are not the copyright holder of this material, or "donating copyrighted materials" if you are.)
For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or published material; such additions will be deleted. Contributors may use copyrighted publications as a source of information, and, if allowed under fair use, may copy sentences and phrases, provided they are included in quotation marks and referenced properly. The material may also be rewritten, providing it does not infringe on the copyright of the original or plagiarize from that source. Therefore, such paraphrased portions must provide their source. Please see our guideline on non-free text for how to properly implement limited quotations of copyrighted text. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously, and persistent violators will be blocked from editing. While we appreciate contributions, we must require all contributors to understand and comply with these policies. Thank you.  Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 20:29, 14 November 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Copyright problem removed