Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Equine/Archive 8

This is an archive of past discussions on Wikipedia:WikiProject Equine. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Archive 5

Archive 6

Archive 7

Archive 8

Archive 9

Archive 10

Proposed solution to some of the naming problems

One reason we're seeing push-back on the idea that "Foo (horse)" is a title for an article about a specific horse named Foo, and some people keep wanting to move Mustang horse (or Mustang or wherever it is now) to Mustang (horse) over the strenuous objections of several of this project's participants, is that we're also using "(horse)" as a disambiguator for other topics being disambiguated for hoses. Our sorta-convention is not consistent enough to be entirely convincing right now.

This can be resolved by changing the latter kind of case (articles about horsey topics, not individual horses) to disambiguations of the form "(horses)" – e.g., move Bolting (horse), to Bolting (horses) – in the cases where natural disambiguation (as in Horse breed) isn't practical. If this were done, every case of "Foo (horse)" titles would then refer to individual horses, and the convention would be entirely consistent. This would also be in keeping with the intent and practice of our parenthetical disambiguation practices more generally: WP uses the topic area as the disambiguator in such cases, and this is generally the general or aggregate term. "Horses" (more broadly, "equines") constitutes a topic area; "horse" does not. While such a disambig is not always plural in form, it very often is – e.g. "(sports)", and so on – when it's not adjectival. To make the concept as clear as possible, note that we have an article Bulling (cattle), which is at that title, not at Bulling (bovine) (which it could be, if it were applicable to bison, etc), nor (more to the point) at Bulling (cow), despite the fact that it's something only cows, not bulls, do.

If we get a micro-consensus of sorts on this here, I or someone else could propose a multi-page move of such articles to titles like Bolting (horses), and if successful, do the same with other animals and whatnot. There is no reason for Rare breed (dog) and Breed type (dog) to not be at "(dogs)" names instead. It more clearly would identify the article as something pertaining to dogs as a class, rather than an individual name for, or something to do with, some particular dog.

I want to be clear that WP:LOCALCONSENSUS policy forbids us from having, say, three or five people here agree this is a good idea and then declaring we have a consensus that applies against the objection of others. It's something that needs to go through proper WP:RM process. But I've also learned to be wary of engaging RM process, when horses are involved, without other participants in this project already having buy-in. The resulting drama has been a bit excessive, historically. — SMcCandlish ☺ ☏ ¢ ≽^ʌⱷ҅_ᴥⱷ^ʌ≼ 06:06, 1 March 2015 (UTC)

Since I'm not up on all things horses and am only familiar with the Mustang issue, how many problems do we actually see on this horse topic? Is fighting over the (horse) issue common at Wikipedia or is it mainly confined to the Mustang issue or maybe one or two others? If the former, this is certainly worth a discussion. If the latter, then it seems far more trouble than its worth. Fyunck(click) (talk) 06:20, 1 March 2015 (UTC)

It comes up repeatedly with Mustang/Mustang horse/Mustang (horse), but has also come up with regard to other articles, with WP:EQUINE's reliance on "(horse)" as an individuals-only disambiguator repeatedly challenged (principally on the basis that it's not entirely consistent). Animal breed article disambiguation has been a hotbed of continual dispute for almost a year, pretty continuously, and sporadically before that. I'm suggesting that at least one aspect of it can be resolved in this simple manner, with this project taking the lead. I'm not sure what "far more trouble" you refer to; there are only a couple of handfuls of articles that would be affected, yet the time and productivity saved by forestalling future rancorous disputes would most likely greatly exceed that spent on moving a few articles around after a hopefully calm RM on the "(horse)" ones that aren't about individual horses. — SMcCandlish ☺ ☏ ¢ ≽^ʌⱷ҅_ᴥⱷ^ʌ≼ 07:52, 1 March 2015 (UTC)

I appreciate the discussion. Thank you. The parenthetical disambiguation issue is, so far, only something that has popped up with drama for the horse breeds versus the named horses, and Mustang is the primary place it happens due to people who like the cars. However, SMcCandlish is right that there is, arguably, a consistency problem - Personally, I don't want to change 3000 article titles, but I DO favor natural disambiguation where possible. (we have Equine conformation, Horse blanket, Skeletal system of the horse, English saddle etc.). Montanabw ^(talk) 08:02, 1 March 2015 (UTC)

For solutions, I personally don't think (horses) is much of an improvement over (horse) and is likely to just create more drama, though in some cases a thought out move to (equine) would work if the topic is also applicable to donkeys or mules. But some things are horse specific, like Driving (horse). The titles developed over a decade of work, so the inconsistency is understandable - before my time there were moves of things like bit (horse) to horse bit and so on, to the point that RMs are the only option. Basically, rather than hundreds of RM dramas, I'm all for coming up with something workable that can go in with wikiproject consensus, which may or may not matter to others, but could reduce drama if presented as a thought-out whole and not a piecemeal thing. Montanabw ^(talk) 08:02, 1 March 2015 (UTC)

Sadly, though, it's not a "handful" of articles, it may not be 3000, but I'm betting it's well over a couple hundred. I can't make the WP search engine confine itself to only article titles with "(horse)" and tagged only for WP Equine and not WP Horse racing (which has the bulk of the named horse articles), but a lot of the anatomy, equipment and other articles are so named... Montanabw ^(talk) 08:08, 1 March 2015 (UTC)

Nowhere near that many. It's actually fairly hard to find examples. I can think of two horse and two dog cases that I know of (I think I mentioned all of those already), and nothing else is coming to mind immediately, e.g. with regard to cats or pigs or goats or whatever. It would literally take longer to go through the domestic animal categories to find the articles than it would to move them after they're found. And it wouldn't be necessary to do this programmatically. Just RM a few of them to set the precedent, then cite it when any others are found. Or maybe I'll get bored and dig them all up.

Checking a few categories:

Zero pig articles would be affected.
Zero goat articles would be affected.
Zero sheep articles would be affected (since singular and plural the same)
Zero chicken articles would be affected (though 3 breed articles need to be moved to natural disambig per the last 6 mo. worth of RMs on that issue)
Zero rabbit articles would be affected (though 2 breed articles need to be natural dab)
Zero cat articles would be affected

And so on. I've already done half the work. :-)

Just to be clear, this proposal would only affect articles that are not about individual animals, which would remain at names like Astra (horse). Articles like Driving (horse) make much more sense at names like Driving (horses) because it's about driving related to horses, not driving related to one specific horse. I wholeheartedly agree that natural disambiguation should be used, however, when it's, well, natural. That's a matter of policy, and we're mostly doing that already. All I'm talking about is a small number of article that seem to need parenthetical disambiguation (supposedly), but which are disambiguated in a way that implies each article is about an individual horse [or dog, or llama or whatever], not topics relating to horses [dogs, etc.] as a class. — SMcCandlish ☺ ☏ ¢ ≽^ʌⱷ҅_ᴥⱷ^ʌ≼ 09:27, 1 March 2015 (UTC)

PS: Bolting (horse) should definitely be at Bolting (equine), because as the first sentence says clearly, it applies to all equidae. — SMcCandlish ☺ ☏ ¢ ≽^ʌⱷ҅_ᴥⱷ^ʌ≼ 09:30, 1 March 2015 (UTC)

I'm not opposed in concept, but I'm wondering if this is a solution in search of a problem? (Sincere inquiry) AFAIK, the only drama was to KEEP natural disambiguation for the horse breeds. That seems well settled. (I am hoping to stay out of the dog and cat dramas, livestock is plenty for me...). On one hand, I do kind of see your point about (horses) but I actually would be curious if people at other WPs are Ok with a similar approach at their articles... I like horses to be the cutting edge of highest and best quality, but I also hesitate to just dive in and do something too unique if it will just generate drama in the opposite direction. Montanabw ^(talk) 00:56, 3 March 2015 (UTC)

As for articles, there are definitely more than a handful. I realize that I have most of the 3000 articles tagged for WPEQ on my watchlist, so I tried a word search on my watchlist (which has 5000 articles on it now) and got 210 article hits titled (horse) - at least half were named horses and redirects from old parenthetical disambiguation, but just as a sampler, we have Back (horse), Bascule (horse), Bay (horse), Bit (horse), Black (horse), Bolting (horse), Bridle path (horse) (not the same as [{Bridle path]]), Buckskin (horse) - and that's just the Bs! (I started the C's and stopped at Center of balance (horse). you get the idea) We have precedent for things like Blinkers (horse tack) or breeching (tack) that could take care of a few random (horse) dabs. But you see this is a daunting prospect. Montanabw ^(talk) 00:56, 3 March 2015 (UTC)

Here is a link for a search of all WP:Equine tagged articles with "(horse" in the title. Plantdrew (talk) 16:53, 23 March 2015 (UTC)

Cool- I didn't know how to do that! Not as bad as I feared; mostly named horses, but I have to say that I am not super-comfortable changing parenthetical dab on the colors or anatomy stuff. Hmmm. Montanabw ^(talk) 19:02, 24 March 2015 (UTC)

American National Riding Commission

Anyone want to convince Signalfire2000 to post her sandbox article on this (User:Signalfire2000/Sandbox) onto mainspace (American National Riding Commission)? Needs a very tiny bit of TLC but looks like enough of a stub/start, and is already mentioned in several existing wiki articles so it should easily pass notability in my opinion. Montanabw? Justlettersandnumbers? Anyone? (Not me, I'm not an equestrian.) Softlavender (talk) 02:21, 7 April 2015 (UTC)

I'll peek. The whole way that new pages have to be approved is just so daunting to new users! Montanabw ^(talk) 02:50, 7 April 2015 (UTC)

Ah! I see the problem! It's still a total copy and paste from the "brief history" section of http://anrc.org/what_is_anrc/ So right now it would get tossed as a copyvio. Help this user to rephrase it into her own words. Montanabw ^(talk) 02:55, 7 April 2015 (UTC)

Oh well, that's too bad. I don't have the knowledge to help her re-create it, but anyone who is a Reference/Electronic Resources Librarian at a college (see her userpage) should be able to do that herself and know how to write a sourced and cited fact-based article rather than a copy-and-paste. Show her the ref codes at the bottom of the editing window and she should do fine I think. Softlavender (talk) 03:47, 7 April 2015 (UTC)

New article needs review

Lendon Gray needs review, project templating, etc. Thanks. Softlavender (talk) 07:57, 12 April 2015 (UTC)

Will need to be someone else other than me, I am kind of overwhelmed by wiki stuff at the moment (a FAC in the works and three drama board things). Montanabw ^(talk) 21:02, 12 April 2015 (UTC)

No worries, JLAN got to it almost immediately. Rest up. I don't know why the long knives are out for you. I kind of made it worse on ANI lol; I've stepped away. Best of luck with all that. I don't know how they expect folks to keep WP clear of socks and vandals if we can't track them on non-visible user subpages. Softlavender (talk)

You were of help there, actually! That drama has now been closed, though a side issue at AfD is still got people going hammer and tongs, but at least not so directly at me (though the AfD is over a subpage I created). It's always a battle, and copyright issues are serious topics that need to be addressed quickly as they can get out of hand in a hurry. Montanabw ^(talk) 05:26, 13 April 2015 (UTC)

Recent changes to the graphics for Template: Medal

There is a template talk page discussion regarding the graphics used for medalists in infobox medals tables occurring at Template talk:Medal#‎Changing from gold/silver/bronze to 1/2/3. As this discussion is within the scope of WP:Equine, you are invited to make your comments on the recent graphics changes there. Cheers. Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 15:49, 18 April 2015 (UTC)

Pony Club nominated for deletion

See Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Pony Club. Montanabw ^(talk) 22:52, 8 May 2015 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Notability (breeds)

Please see Wikipedia:Notability (breeds) for a draft of a future proposal for a notability guideline on domestic animal breeds. As your wiki-project is involved in this area, I am dropping off an invite to the discussion. Please visit Wikipedia talk:Notability (breeds). Thanks! JT_dale^Talk~ 16:18, 14 May 2015 (UTC)

A press article copying WP article "Noseband" ?

Here : http://www.horsetimesegypt.com/pdf/articles/TRAINING_&_TIPS/Training_Tips_The_Horse_World_Of_Nose_Bands_HT45.pdf, and here : Noseband. A lot of sentences similar. Strange. Do you have some "avis" ? --Tsaag Valren (talk) 21:23, 15 May 2015 (UTC)

{{backwardscopy}} usually does the trick. Thanks for the heads up, I'll add it. Montanabw ^(talk) 17:42, 16 May 2015 (UTC)

NOTICE: Persondata has been officially deprecated

Persondata has been deprecated and the template and input data are subject to removal from all bio articles in the near future. For those editors who entered accurate data into the persondata templates of riders, notable horsemen and other bio subjects, you are advised to manually transfer that data to Wikidata before the impending mass deletion occurs in order to preserve accurate data. Here are three examples of Wikidata for notable swimmers: Ryan Lochte, Mary Wayte and Dara Torres. If you have any more questions about the persondata removal, Wikidata, etc., please ping me. Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 14:58, 3 June 2015 (UTC)

Notability question

Is anyone here experienced with jockey articles? How can we assess their notability in a unified manner? Ping me if you know! Best, CesareAngelotti (talk) 14:52, 5 June 2015 (UTC)

WikiProject Horse racing is drafting a standard, it's rough, and incomplete, but it's here: Wikipedia:WikiProject Horse racing/Notability. Montanabw ^(talk) 06:37, 6 June 2015 (UTC)

Equus caballus africanus listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Equus caballus africanus. Please participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. -- Tavix ^(talk) 20:29, 3 August 2015 (UTC)

AfC submission

What do you reckon about Draft:Edward (Denny) Emerson? Thank you, FoCuS contribs; talk to me! 17:37, 7 August 2015 (UTC)

Possibly salvageable with third party sources. He's on the edge of notability, but the article needs more third-party sources. Montanabw ^(talk) 07:48, 9 August 2015 (UTC)

Gourmette chain listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Gourmette chain. Please participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. According to Wiktionary, gourmette is a French word for a curb chain. Input from editors involved with this Wikiproject would be appreciated. Cheers. Ivanvector 🍁 (talk) 19:24, 18 August 2015 (UTC)

Article alerts

This is a notice to let you know about Article alerts, a fully-automated subscription-based news delivery system designed to notify WikiProjects and Taskforces when articles are entering Articles for deletion, Requests for comment, Peer review and other workflows (full list). The reports are updated on a daily basis, and provide brief summaries of what happened, with relevant links to discussion or results when possible. A certain degree of customization is available; WikiProjects and Taskforces can choose which workflows to include, have individual reports generated for each workflow, have deletion discussion transcluded on the reports, and so on. An example of a customized report can be found here.

If you are already subscribed to Article Alerts, it is now easier to report bugs and request new features. We are also in the process of implementing a "news system", which would let projects know about ongoing discussions on a wikipedia-wide level, and other things of interest. The developers also note that some subscribing WikiProjects and Taskforces use the display=none parameter, but forget to give a link to their alert page. Your alert page should be located at "Wikipedia:PROJECT-OR-TASKFORCE-HOMEPAGE/Article alerts". Questions and feedback should be left at Wikipedia talk:Article alerts.

Message sent by User:Addbot to all active wiki projects per request, Comments on the message and bot are welcome here.

Thanks. — Headbomb {^ταλκ_{κοντριβς} – WP Physics} 09:07, 15 March, 2009 (UTC)

Need opinions of WPEQ members

This has been sitting around for awhile and now languishing. Need some more votes. (I supported): http://en.wiki.x.io/w/index.php?title=Talk%3ATrot_%28horse_gait%29&diff=541061190&oldid=540380214#Requested_move

Move request

Please note: http://en.wiki.x.io/wiki/Talk:American_Paint_horse#Requested%20moves

Of interest to WPEQ

Talk:Jumping_(horse)#Requested_move_10_September_2015. Requested move. Montanabw ^(talk) 05:22, 10 September 2015 (UTC)

Mountain Pleasure Horse

We seem to have no article on the Mountain Pleasure Horse breed. [1] Is there any need for it? It is a formally recognized true breed, not a crossbreed. White Arabian mare (Neigh) 14:34, 24 September 2015 (UTC)

I don't actually see any reference to it on the Myers Park Homeowners Association homepage … Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 18:52, 24 September 2015 (UTC)

Ugh, wrong URL! This is the correct one. [2] Sorry about that. White Arabian mare (Neigh) 21:05, 24 September 2015 (UTC)

I'm a little dubious, their claim that DNA "proves" them to be ancestors of Saddlebreds, etc., is scientifically dubious... DNA can't "prove" a breed, only indicate common ancestry. I'd look for more than just the organization's web site - a lot of these "breeds" are actually a group of kind of self-serving breeders. I'd look for them in a neutral, third-party source. For example, I tried to AfD Moyle horse as "not a breed" but when we found them listed in Hendricks, that was enough to prevent deletion. Virginia Highlander is another one that I think is pretty dubious (ironically, even though I created it). If you can't find either a refernce to the breed in a general "horse breeds of the world" - type of book, or multiple neutral, third-party (not horse for sale or breeding farm sites!) sources, then I'd say no. See what links you can find. Montanabw ^(talk) 23:44, 24 September 2015 (UTC)

Here are some links. [3] [4] If I write the article, I'll put it on my sandbox first and get it right before launching it to public space. I don't have any books with that breed in them, because I don't have any breed books that were printed in America--they're all from Europe. None of mine even have Racking Horses or most of the mustang sub-breeds. I want the one about breeds from North America! (But they don't have it in the bookstore.) White Arabian mare (Neigh) 02:00, 25 September 2015 (UTC)

Horses on Bianditz mountain

I've nominated this photo of Horses on Bianditz mountain for Featured Picture consideration.

Discussion is at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Horses on Bianditz mountain.

— Cirt (talk) 16:56, 14 October 2015 (UTC)

By request

I un-redirected Riding horse to create as a stand-alone article parallel to Driving (horse). This per request of some users. Totally a stub, feel free to expand. Montanabw ^(talk) 21:14, 14 October 2015 (UTC)

Notability discussion?

Based on a conversation on my talk page, do we want to work on any additional guidelines to assist in assessing notability for horse people? I'm noticing a few more pr-type articles here lately and it might be good to have some sort of amendment to WP:NSPORTS#Equestrian sport, (WP:NRODEO and WP:NHORSERACING are pretty much done) that is akin to Wikipedia:WikiProject Horse racing/Notability. Basically thinking about standards for "these are pretty much slam dunks for notability in the field, "probably notable," here are the gray areas..." Thoughts? Montanabw ^(talk) 20:38, 18 December 2015 (UTC)

I don't know about additional guidelines because it varies so much from breed to breed. Some breeds have Halls of Fame; some don't. Sometimes people start out in the mainstream organization, accumulate a lot of wins, and then switch to the knock-off group because they get ticked off at somebody. Unlike racing where there's the Jockey Club, there's no one group most pros belong to--most of the hunter or dressage people will be in the USEF or USDF, most of the stock horse people will be in AQHA or one of the western performance groups, most of the gaited people will be in their own association. It might end up in a "my trainer is better than yours because they have more points" argument. White Arabian Filly (Neigh) 21:23, 18 December 2015 (UTC)

My nickel's worth - I think a Hall of Fame inductee could be a consideration, but not a deal breaker. I agree with WAF regarding some of the variables, and I don't know why we couldn't have a dedicated official guideline for Notability (equine sports). With regards to people, HoF can be very political, not to mention the fact that some equine associations include administrative employees and financial donors; therefore, it's not only limiting it also doesn't necessarily speak to the notability of a sport's figure. I also think earners of'qualifying national & world championship titles in their respective associations are slam dunk notable. Perhaps along with a national & world championship title, we could also add finished the year in the Top Ten in their division, and/or finished the year in the Top Five in their respective region, and/or won a circuit championship. If a competitor isn't in the HoF, or hasn't won a National or World title, they may have other equine related achievements that might fill the gap, such as being one of 5 founders of a state equine association. We could also limit it to exhibitors/horses competing in the top 3 divisions of competition such as with the NCHA Open, Non-pro & Youth divisions. Winners (top ten) of highly publicized aged events with large purses would also be notable. Notability in the AQHA may be a bit tougher to sort through because there are so many different divisions and classes, but again, HoF, or qualifying National and World Championships would be notable. The Top Ten All American Quarter Horse Congress winners are also notable because of the scope and size of that single event which is not a qualifying event, but huge nonetheless. We also need to consider notability from an historic perspective so we're not dismissing some of the notable trail blazers in the equine industry that laid the foundation for the associations and competitions we enjoy today - maybe allow for primary sources as necessary. There are quite a few variables but even so, I don't think equine/equestrian notability should be any more restrictive than the guidelines set forth for other events in WP:Notability_(sports). Atsme^📞📧 07:59, 19 December 2015 (UTC)

We do have a general guideline at WP:NSPORTS#Equestrian sport, but it is more FEI-focused. I do agree that we should try to recognize and acknowledge the major historic notable figures from the pre-internet era! That's a significant lack. But I personally don't think we want to even start down the road of granting GNG to annual national championship winners -- horses or people -- because across breeds -- and nations -- and disciplines -- there are thousands every year. (We could do something like List of National Champion foo horses for some of the "one horse wins this each year" things though...) We could do, for example, something like the Breeders Cup article for some of the biggest shows or List of foo winners- type articles the way they do in the horse racing project (e.g. Santa Anita Derby, etc...). WP:GNG is kind of the trump card -- outside, third-party notability. If, say, we have a horse like I Am Jose that does something not often accomplished, then yes. But in most cases, I think maybe we should be thinking lists... Montanabw ^(talk) 04:58, 21 December 2015 (UTC)

Thousands? I don't think so, but even if there were, should it really matter? There are thousands of amateurs and professionals in other sporting events who simply have to show up for the game to be considered notable, whether they win or not. Why would we want to shortchange the horse industry's notables who actually won the titles? Equestrians who are competing for world and national titles work just as hard, if not harder, than any other athlete. Some have dedicated their lives to it. WP:Notability (sports) states: sports figures are likely to meet Wikipedia's basic standards of inclusion if they have, for example, participated in a major international amateur or professional competition at the highest level. Winning a national or world show title in one of the highly publicized equine sporting events is surely what one would consider at the highest level. Look at the notability requirements for track & field. That guideline is why I mentioned adding a few other criteria to the qualifications for notability. I think we can hammer it out a little and make it meld right into the equestrian equivalents for GNG. Also had another thought - there isn't a whole lot more we can add to Jack Brizendine, so maybe we could consider a section devoted to starter rated BLPs - maybe add World Champion and National Champion categories, and an Equine professional category, etc.? Atsme^📞📧 07:41, 21 December 2015 (UTC)

Yes, I think we can add articles on major shows, but winning individuals, maybe/maybe not... I don't disagree with your fundamental premise (that equestrians are athletes worthy of note!) I think that "the highest level" is the problem: Maybe we are discussing two different things - people versus the shows or sports? For individuals, I suspect that we have to narrow things down to meet WP:GNG; for example, take the Arabian National Championships, where they even give a "national champion" for walk-trot equitation. (in multiple classes. They also give little kids prizes at the Congress, too! Sorry, no, but I could not support creating articles about 20 or 30 children under 10 every year! No way would the GNG cops agree with us on that. So maybe we need to figure out how to determine "highest level." I mean, the Congress is a way bigger event than, say, the Missouri Fox Trotter nationals-- I presume they have them! But even for the Congress, is the champion barrel racing horse really notable? I think not... More discussion? Montanabw ^(talk) 08:22, 21 December 2015 (UTC)

I understand your point regarding individuals and the many classes, but I'm not referring to limited classes (limited by age, etc.) which is why I suggested qualifiers as with Track & Field. For example, the two NCHA qualifying titles - World Champion Open and NonPro (riders), and National Champion Open and NonPro are different from each other and are much different from single breed events - there is only one Open and one NonPro (excluding the "limited" events), and both are international. The world shows and nationals require qualifying points to get there, and with the nationals, it usually requires a Top Ten national or area division title (out of 20+ divisions) to even qualify for the national work-offs. NCHA has only one Youth division unlike breed associations where it is broken down by age but I'm ok with eliminating the youth division because of potential age issues in Wikipedia. Most breed associations require a set number of points accumulated in qualifying events to be eligible to compete in a World or National Championship event. Congress is actually not a "qualifying" event rather it is a standalone international event. We can narrow down the Congress field to All-Around Champions and High Point Champions in their respective Divisions (Open and Amateur), excluding limited divisions that are not AQHA recognized. The American Saddlebred Horse Assoc. hosts a 5-Gaited World Championship, the NRHA has their major annual events, and so does Barrel Racing (and other NFR events). The most notable events and winners are published in local newspapers and/or get write-ups in their respective breed publications or industry related magazines and news sources. Maybe another qualifier can be notable enough to have made the cover of the association's publication. If a major manufacturer of horse tack builds a specific design of saddle, bit, spurs or halter named after you or your horse, it should meet one facet of GNG, especially if presented in combination with published articles in various equine magazines, newspapers, etc.Atsme^📞📧 16:16, 21 December 2015 (UTC)

As a side note, I'm creating a list of the TWH foundation horses in my sandbox and going to create a list of the World Grand Champions either separately or as a part of the TWHNC article. All of them probably meet notability, although many were shown until they hit 5 or 6, then put in that class, and then retired to stud after they won the big stake--there's almost a set procedure most of the owners follow. The ones that need separate articles are the ones who made a mark as a sire or had such a weird story they got written about a lot. There are a couple more I'll probably do, and I'm looking into doing one or two of the now-dead early trainers and breeders as well. It would be interesting to do the Racking Horses as well, but they are so small it's nearly impossible to find sources. By the way, they do have a world show for Missouri Fox Trotters: [5]. Add, later: I put the list of World grand champs as a user subpage for now, but will probably end up moving it to the TWHNC article the way the list of Kentucky Derby winners are listed in that article.White Arabian Filly (Neigh) 21:01, 21 December 2015 (UTC)

My thinking is that we should start with lists, either attached to show articles or stand-alone. The most notable horses or people on those lists may wind up with their own articles. Whatever we decide, we have to remember that we are only offering guidance in how to interpret WP:GNG for horses; absent significant third-party coverage (I like the idea of noting if equipment -- or a Breyer horse model -- has been named in honor of the animal...) I have been following the talk at NSPORTS for a while, and there was recently a discussion over whether someone who played Major League Baseball was notable if the only coverage they ever had was to appear on a team roster and in stats charts. We don't (yet) even have articles on every winner of the Kentucky Oaks. Examples of what I'm talking about can be swiped from WP Horse racing, such as Kentucky Derby top four finishers or, in an article about the event, the list at Santa Anita Derby. Montanabw ^(talk) 18:34, 22 December 2015 (UTC)

I have started a list of all the TWHNC winners in userspace here! I may put it as a stand-alone list once it's done, or maybe just use it as a part of the show article, the way winners are listed in the Kentucky Derby article. White Arabian Filly (Neigh) 23:46, 22 December 2015 (UTC)

Note to members

Of interest to this project: Talk:Equine-assisted therapy. Montanabw ^(talk) 04:31, 11 January 2016 (UTC)

Based on what I've read, I don't understand why the articles should be merged. There is enough information for both to keep them as stand-alone. I see stubs all over WP that require attention but are being ignored, especially in the Project Med category. Why have these few articles garnered such attention? Atsme^📞📧 22:25, 12 January 2016 (UTC)

Probably because there's not enough editors interested in content creation. I also think those articles could have been left as stand-alones. Personally, right now I'm doing some work on the various guinea pig breeds, because they all redirected to one fairly bad article. (I own 4 piggies.) White Arabian Filly (Neigh) 23:39, 12 January 2016 (UTC)

Well, I read you loud and clear and at the same time, I remember a big stir over my attempt to merge dictionary definitions that were stand alone articles. In fact, my attempt to delete those definitions while I was in the process of creating a list for them along with trying to get them moved over to Wiki Species was the catalyst for a block; therefore, I'm inclined to oppose a merge since admins seem to think stubbies are A-OK. Atsme^📞📧 23:52, 12 January 2016 (UTC)

At the moment, due to the low quality of the equine-assisted psychotherapy article, I decided to not fight that merge. The "equine therapy" article was even worse and I never opposed that merge. If you want to go over to the discussion linked above, there are several different threads going. My position at the moment is that the therapeutic riding and hippotherapy ones should stay separate from the overview article (which should have a summary), though perhaps an argument could be made that those two should be combined because there's a lot of overlap and confused terminology. My own interest is more the mental health side, which has the more difficult sourcing questions, but working to improve the riding therapy articles would be good practice in using WP:MEDRS- compliant sources; there's plenty of decent research out there on those fields. Montanabw ^(talk) 22:30, 13 January 2016 (UTC)

Merging Murakoz horse and Međimurje horse

Hello. These breeds seem be the same. There's no Murakoz or Međimurje in Hungary in DAD-IS, and Murakoz is cited as a possible name for Međimurje. A magyar-speaker said Murakoz is just hungarian name for Međimurje. We are discussing the merging in french, but there's a Wikidata problem as in english you have 2 separated articles too --Tsaag Valren (talk) 16:21, 21 January 2016 (UTC)

I agree that the merge is needed, since they appear to be about the exact same breed and one article even says that the other name is merely a different name for the same horse. White Arabian Filly (Neigh) 17:05, 21 January 2016 (UTC)

Okay ! I don't know how initiate a merging ask procedure in english... --Tsaag Valren (talk) 17:49, 21 January 2016 (UTC)

Clarification needed beetween Sumba pony, Sumbawa pony and Sandalwood

Hello again. Wikidata work is very useful for a "clarification" among horse breeds. There's a problem with your articles Sandalwood Pony and Sumba and Sumbawa Pony. According to the FAO, Sumbawa Pony is an individual breed (see : http://dad.fao.org/cgi-bin/EfabisWeb.cgi?sid=f7b81060b3e0fb484b1d3b079a87b143,reportsreport8a_50008503 ) and Sumba, or Sumbanese, just another name for the Sandalwood breed (see : http://dad.fao.org/cgi-bin/EfabisWeb.cgi?sid=c4b8d69138fe011b50981900db4b1439,reportsreport8a_50008502) . PS : There's a semi-automatization for inclusion (after human correction, of course) of data from DAD-IS about domestic breeds, that's what i'm working for now. I work also on Wikidata models for books (like : http://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q22137019) Do you wish to join ? --Tsaag Valren (talk) 21:37, 21 January 2016 (UTC)

See Template:Horse breeds of Indonesia; it seems there is a good case to be made in either direction, plus most of these little horses appear to have very similar ancestry. I hesitate to merge these... (and also, the DAD-IS is often quite inaccurate --in both directions -- sometimes it has too manybreeds and other times too few!) Montanabw ^(talk) 00:02, 22 January 2016 (UTC)

According to this book chapter :

Bernice de Jong Boers, « The ‘Arab’ of the Indonesian Archipelago: The Famed Horse Breeds of Sumbawa », dans Breeds of Empire: The ‘invention’ of the horse in Southern Africa and Maritime Southeast Asia, 1500–1950, vol. 42 de NIAS studies in Asian topics, Copenhague, NIAS,‎ 2007, 263 p. (ISBN 8776940144 et 9788776940140), p. 51-64

Sumbawa ponies are divided into two types, the Tambora pony (almost disappeared with the 1815 eruption) and the Bima pony, who is considered as a variety of Sumbawa breed in DAD-IS (http://dad.fao.org/cgi-bin/EfabisWeb.cgi?sid=20bff429f78bd3add5cd230ef5903cd1,reportsreport8a_50009136), and have separate history from Sumba ponies. --Tsaag Valren (talk) 00:34, 22 January 2016 (UTC)

Parelli Natural Horsemanship

Hi all,

There has been some dispute over deletions of cited, factual material on the Parelli Natural Horsemanship page. The disputes don't seem to be getting resolved. Whether you're pro-PNH, anti-PNH or indifferent, as long as you're impartial, you're officially invited to hop in and add your yea or neigh (pun intended) to the mix, if you're so inclined.

JackieLL007 (talk) 02:38, 9 February 2016 (UTC)

Yes, other members are welcome to discuss. Montanabw ^(talk)|GO THUNDER! 19:16, 9 February 2016 (UTC)

The controversies over the editing could and should be used to improve the article. I think it could really go to GA if the right kinds of sources were used. White Arabian Filly (Neigh) 17:18, 10 February 2016 (UTC)

Made horsey userboxes

Just a note to members, some of you may be interested: I finally got tired of the fact that there were so few horse boxes and made a few of my own here. (I definitely thought eventing should have one, since it's in the freaking Olympics!) I also put them in the main galleries so others can find them. If anybody wants any more done, just ask, although I have plans for a couple more of the most popular breeds and sports, like Quarter Horses and maybe barrel racing. White Arabian Filly (Neigh) 21:09, 13 February 2016 (UTC)

Thank you, White Arabian Filly. Much appreciated! Also wanted to mention that I have a pretty nice barrel racing photo if you need it for a user box. Atsme^📞📧 22:47, 13 February 2016 (UTC)

Sure, I could use it. Is it in the western riding category on Commons? White Arabian Filly (Neigh) 16:12, 14 February 2016 (UTC)

Link the finished ones at the userboxes page so others can find them all in one spot Montanabw ^(talk) 08:49, 15 February 2016 (UTC)

I think they are all there now. White Arabian Filly (Neigh) 19:42, 15 February 2016 (UTC)

A question

I was invited to join the page. How do I do that? 😕 Kendall Shackelford (talk) 20:04, 17 February 2016 (UTC)

Kendall Shackelford, Go to the section where it's headed "participants" and sign your name at the bottom of the list. We'd be happy to have you. White Arabian Filly (Neigh) 15:56, 20 February 2016 (UTC)

Thank you! Kendall Shackelford (talk) 19:50, 22 February 2016 (UTC)

A newbie needs help

Another COI corporate-sounding account with articles trapped in AfC limbo-land. User talk:FEI2015. They appear to be doing good-faith work, let's see if we can round up a posse or cavalry to help them out! Montanabw ^(talk) 17:31, 24 February 2016 (UTC)

I'll go help out...that seems to be fast becoming my specialty...

Update: I did some gnoming on the article and sent them a talk message. I'm going to watchlist the article too. White Arabian Filly (Neigh) 23:54, 24 February 2016 (UTC)

I'd say when you are happy with it, ping me and I'll move it in. I'll take any flak from the AfC folks if they aren't happy about it. Be sure to run it through "earwig" the copyvio checker, I'm strongly suspecting there is more copypaste in there than their should be. Montanabw ^(talk) 01:09, 25 February 2016 (UTC)

Categorizing Percheron photos in commons

Hello. I'm categorizing 300 Percheron photos taken by a researcher from INRA in commons, but there's some cases, I don't know the english name for precise things. Can you help ? Perhap's these photos will be useful in some en articles too.

What's the english name of the bit and the "pink" on the muzzle ? That is a "Liverpool" bit; assuming the horse is gray, the mottling (is what I'd call it) is probably that depigmentation that you occasionally see with gray horses --~~~~
And this one ? Just a younger gray horse, that white would be a very large "snip" (see horse markings for the magic English words)--~~~~
In french we call this piece of leather a "croupière" English: crupper --~~~~
I don't know if there's a special name for this red thing. Foreign tradition ? (+ other photos with the same thing in commons) I'd say it's a Tassel. -- ~~~~
I add this one just for pleasure ; nice scratching/rolling, no ? Rolling. ~~~~

--Tsaag Valren (talk) 15:45, 8 March 2016 (UTC)

Good pictures!

1. The pink looks like just mottled skin to me, such as the Appaloosas have. I'm not sure about the bit. It has a shank, so I guess it's some type of curb bit?

2. The English name of the black thing that blocks the horse's view to the side is blinders.

3. The English is very close, it's called a crupper, probably derived from French!

4. That's a tassel in English. They use them on Arabian horses in native costume shows over here, so maybe the tradition of using them stems from the Middle East.

5. Looks like he's having fun.

White Arabian Filly ^Neigh 21:43, 8 March 2016 (UTC)

Thanks for these answers ! I try a best of these 300 photos :

very beautiful horse, collar, and an historical monument behind.
Interesting close up.
"Amazone" mount (Sidesaddle)
other amazone mount (and bridle)
good expression
Sadly under a grey sky.
Amazing vaulting photo ! (and rider is looking the camera)
Eight in hand ?

Whoo! Those are some really nice ones, especially the vaulting, close up, and eight-in-hand. 😊 Those can definitely be used somewhere. The driving one may be good for the driving horse article, I don't think the pictures there are that great. White Arabian Filly ^Neigh 00:15, 9 March 2016 (UTC)

Good fun! Montanabw ^(talk) 09:18, 9 March 2016 (UTC)

Thanks to you ! I think all the categories are good now. The close-up on the liverpool bit is the best picture we have for this particular bit, and the close up on the blinders is one of our best images too. --Tsaag Valren (talk) 20:06, 9 March 2016 (UTC)

sex in horse infoboxes

In many, if not all, of the infoboxes of individual horses, sex is described as "gelding", "stallion", "mare", "filly" etc. As a general biologist, I thought that in the English language, sex meant either "male" or "female". This is supported by the Sex article. I think it would be more accurate in the infoboxes to write "Male (stallion)" or "Male (gelding)", etc. for females. Many readers will not actually know what a gelding is, let alone that it is a male. The same is probably true of filly. We need to remember that we are editing for general readership here, not just those already accustomed to livestock terminology. DrChrissy ^(talk) 16:41, 3 April 2016 (UTC)

I guess, although having gelding, mare or stallion wikilinked is a big help, since somebody can just read the article if they don't know the term. Filly or colt are harder because, unless a horse dies at 3 years old, it's not going to remain a filly or colt forever; in those instances mare or stallion/gelding seems more appropriate. Still, those terms have all been used for hundreds of years and if somebody wants to know anything about horses, they have to learn them sooner or later. White Arabian Filly ^Neigh 20:45, 3 April 2016 (UTC)

This practice seems contrary to that of other animal infoxes. I have just done a very quick survey of Category:Individual mammals and associated pages. I did not find a single article which used the "technical" term (gilt, ewe, boar, bitch, etc.), they all use just male or female.

Examples include -

Dolly (sheep), Shrek (sheep)

Balarama (elephant), Packy (elephant)

Laika, Lassie

Romulus (donkey)

DrChrissy ^(talk) 21:38, 3 April 2016 (UTC)

Interesting. Perhaps we should update those infoboxes so it shows the proper terminology - sum of all knowledge. Surely we don't have to be gender neutral when it comes to such things, do we? I'd be in a world of hurt if I instructed my workers to bring up the brown female horse, or to put the male horse out in the pasture, the latter of which could cause major issues if they turned the stud loose by mistake. 😝 ^{Atsme📞📧} 22:11, 3 April 2016 (UTC)

I am actually suggesting both. Technically, a stallion is not the sex or gender, but a term that relates to his age and the fact he still has all his bits. However, I have absolutely no objection to qualifying his sex by stating Male (stallion). And the same for sheep (lamb, wether, ewe, ram), elephant (calf, cow, bull,what do we call a castrated elephant?...probably very angry! ;-)) and so on.

^{DrChrissy, your edit summary - could it have been a Freudian slip? Going forward, a reword perhaps? 😝 ^{Atsme📞📧} 22:37, 3 April 2016 (UTC)}

I thought of a lot worse before settling on that! ;-) DrChrissy ^(talk) 22:46, 3 April 2016 (UTC)

I think that there is a place for technical language in the horse articles, just as there is for nautical articles or other areas where the terms of art are so common that to not use them sounds profoundly ignorant. Also, given the huge number of geldings that have WP articles (most sport horses, many race horses), I think it is useful to keep the horse terminology. I'm cool with wikilinking stallion, mare, gelding, though--defining the terms via the link is fine, and far more elegant than having to keep saying, "a stallion is a boy horse." Seriously, if someone wants to go through about 10,000 articles (including all the ones on racehorses tagged at WP Horse racing), to replace everything with "male/female/castrated male" -- well, it won't be me. As an aside, I'm amused that the infobox for Lassie notes "gender" instead of "sex" -- which makes sense, I suppose, in that gender is identity as opposed to biology, given that all the dogs that played Lassie were actually males... Montanabw ^(talk) 21:20, 16 April 2016 (UTC)

Horse images

Just to let everyone know - I created a Horse gallery that includes a variety of images from my stock image library. I am adding to it as I can, so if you have a particular image you're in need of, please let me know and I'll check my library to see if I can accommodate your needs. Happy editing! ^{Atsme📞📧} 21:38, 11 April 2016 (UTC)

Hello Atsme. Your photos are very good quality ones. I proposed to my editor to use one in a book in french about horse breeds (with the good credit-licence of course). If I can add a thing don't hesitate to tell me ! Have you other paint horses and appaloosas photos ? --Tsaag Valren (talk) 19:52, 26 April 2016 (UTC)

Thank you for the kind words, Tsaag Valren. I do have more photos and will upload what I have as soon as my IP fixes the issues with my connection (because of the flooding here in Texas, they're saying another week). My download speeds run around 1.3 to 3.0 mbps which is painstakingly slow! Upload speeds don't even register their so slow - like .1 mbps. Ugh! I feel fortunate that I can still contribute "textually". 🤓 ^{Atsme📞📧} 21:30, 26 April 2016 (UTC)

My speeds ran that way all the time, which is why I dropped the internet connection and got a smartphone. (I live on top of a mountain.)📲 Some of your recent pictures, Atsme, may be good for the cowboy article, and the western tack articles. White Arabian Filly ^Neigh 21:36, 26 April 2016 (UTC)

Hi Tsaag Valren!! Atsme does take nice photos, doesn't she!! Also, you might want to let Ealdgyth know about your project; she is also a professional photographer and horse person (she took the lead image of the black Mustang, for example.) We are fortunate to have two really good photographers in this project! Montanabw ^(talk) 22:49, 28 April 2016 (UTC)

Rastafarian Show jumper

At Afd, of interest to this project: http://en.wiki.x.io/wiki/Oliver_Skeete . Montanabw ^(talk) 06:54, 28 May 2016 (UTC)

Hoofing it!

Hi all, a conversation at a project article gave me the notion that maybe we need a cleanup drive on the horse hoof and farriery-related articles. We have a couple content forks that probably need to be re-integrated, and perhaps we need to improve the cross-linkin between them. Perhaps even a farriery navbox might be a good idea. Thoughts? Montanabw ^(talk) 18:33, 10 June 2016 (UTC)

List of relevant articles (add if I've missed one):

Horse hoof
Farrier
Blacksmith
Equine podiatry
Barefoot horse/natural hoof care (also some articles on the people in the movement, notably Jaime Jackson and Hiltrud Strasser...)
others???.... (add here)

Here's an idea for putting tools in at Farrier:

Farrier's tools
Tool	Picture	Function
Hoof knife		Used to trim frog and sole of hoof[ref goes here]

We could finish this here as a sandbox and then copy/paste over to the article, or just copy/paste this over there, and expand...

White Arabian Filly ^Neigh 20:02, 10 June 2016 (UTC)

Greeting for horsey newbies

{{subst:User:White Arabian Filly/Horsewelcome}} produces:

Welcome to Wikipedia!

Hi, WikiProject Equine, thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia, the free online encyclopedia! Here are some links that may help you:

The Teahouse, a place to get advice about editing
Manual of Style, which shows you how to write articles
The Five Pillars, features which all articles should have

You may also be interested in WikiProject Equine, which writes and improves articles about horses, horse sports (including the Olympic disciplines), horse care and training, or WikiProject Horse racing, which focuses on horse races, racehorses, and jockeys. Please remember to sign your talk page posts with four tildes ~~~~, which will automatically produce your username and the date. If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me on my talk page. And again, welcome! White Arabian Filly ^Neigh 22:03, 6 July 2016 (UTC)

Some other projects have similar things to welcome newbies editing in a certain area of WP, so I thought we could use this. Feel free to suggest things I forgot, or use if you come across a horsey newbie. Notice that it says WikiProject Equine because it automatically uses the page name, and signs your name for you! (Plus, the actual horses add a cute touch, I think.) White Arabian Filly ^Neigh 21:55, 6 July 2016 (UTC)

I like it! Possibly make the blue background just a wee bit lighter--same color, just a few shades lighter. Old eyes have trouble with the contrast between text and background. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Montanabw (talk • contribs) 05:38, July 7, 2016

Nicely done! I really like how the light hits the horses running in the image. It really stands out. I agree the blue could be a shade or 2 lighter. ^{Atsme📞📧} 17:35, 7 July 2016 (UTC)

I lightened it up a bit on the sandbox page, though it won't show up here because it's substituted, not transcluded. Yes, I saw the picture and loved it! The middle horse looks kind of disgusted to me... White Arabian Filly ^Neigh 18:34, 7 July 2016 (UTC)

❤️!!! Great job, WAF! ^{Atsme📞📧} 15:36, 8 July 2016 (UTC)

Next step?

To Montanabw‬ and White Arabian Filly (or anyone else who can help)

I am done with this draft Draft:SmartPak and am hoping for help on how to get it published. Thank you! Laureeb (talk) 00:06, 20 July 2016 (UTC)

One of us will go over there and move it into mainspace later. White Arabian Filly ^Neigh 15:05, 20 July 2016 (UTC)

Update: I did a move on it, so it's now live. Congrats! White Arabian Filly ^Neigh 22:43, 20 July 2016 (UTC)

Pony of the Americas photos (question to my americans friends ;)

Hello,

4 years ago, I translated this article Pony of the Americas into this : fr:Poney des Amériques. But photos are really bad ones :/. I've no chance to find this pony next to my house, but perhaps you have some contacts for better photos ? --Tsaag Valren (talk) 14:38, 22 July 2016 (UTC)

Hm, there are no better ones on Commons. Atsme, do you happen to have any POA pics? My phone refuses to let me upload pics, but I don't have any of POAs in any case. White Arabian Filly ^Neigh 20:08, 22 July 2016 (UTC)

Don't think so...but will check around. ^{Atsme📞📧} 20:56, 22 July 2016 (UTC)

Thanks to you --Tsaag Valren (talk) 21:07, 22 July 2016 (UTC)

Tsaag Valren, I'm not having any luck finding any POA photos. I've got Shetlands everywhere, and a Galicino but no POAs. ^{Atsme📞📧} 04:57, 26 July 2016 (UTC)

Socky sock, sock?

Hey all -- do you think we have a sockpuppet here, possibly an undisclosed paid editor? Compare [6] and [7]. I'm seeing a ton of new equestrian articles, probably because of the leadup to the Olympics, but I'm wondering if some are paid puff pieces. I helped draft WP:NEQUESTRIAN, do you think it needs refinement? Montanabw ^(talk) 04:42, 26 July 2016 (UTC)

Who would be paying? A sponsor, perhaps? I'm more inclined to think COI, such as a coach writing it, the actual individuals, teammates, or someone close. At first glance they appear to pass notability per Olympics. Are there issues I'm not seeing that need to be addressed? ^{Atsme📞📧} 04:55, 26 July 2016 (UTC)

The main issue is the bad quality of the articles. Used infobox person for a horse, uploaded copyrighted pics, used "glitter pony" language that sounded like they knew the horse personally, and had minimal refs. I did a lot of cleanup on the 3 new horse articles. They could be just huge fans, though, and not socks or paid accounts. I guess we wait and see. Olympic frenzy has probably hit a lot of people. White Arabian Filly ^Neigh 20:21, 26 July 2016 (UTC)

^{White Arabian Filly, if they used the back portion of infobox person it could apply to both. 😆 ^{Atsme📞📧} 23:11, 26 July 2016 (UTC)}

Supersleuth on the case; they're not socks, but both write for The Plaid Horse Magazine. I don't consider that outing, given that all it takes is Googling Powlick AND Puckett. ‑ Iridescent 20:43, 26 July 2016 (UTC)

Looks like Diannaa is also on the case. Between the four of us, we should be able to clean up the mess. WAF is probably the best newbie-welcoming "good cop" we have at WPEQ (that's a complement, by the way), so if she can educate them, that would be great... I am trying also, but I have a bit more of an edge to me... (gee, never knew that about me, didja? LOL!) Montanabw ^(talk) 22:54, 26 July 2016 (UTC)

Interesting...not a penny-anty ezine, either. Is it a matter of them simply not understanding OR, or our 3 core content policies? One would think they would pass WP:CIR as far as writing prose. Yes - no? ^{Atsme📞📧} 23:16, 26 July 2016 (UTC)

Probably just don't understand policies; newbies often don't. If they get to understanding the policies, they could be a big help. There are a lot of Olympic medalist horses that don't have articles, particularly ones from European countries. (I bet because most sources are in other languages.) White Arabian Filly ^Neigh 01:31, 27 July 2016 (UTC)

Update: I've been talking with them on their talk pages and think they can be good contributors if helped along. We have a shortage of jumper-oriented editors on here anyway... I'm just looking forward to the Tennessee Walking Horse National Celebration next month. I wanna see the first four-time winner crowned! White Arabian Filly ^Neigh 01:49, 28 July 2016 (UTC)

You are probably right. I am a little burned-out on dealing with pink pony people. I hope you have a great time at the Celebration -- you are going? If so -- take pictures! Montanabw ^(talk) 18:39, 29 July 2016 (UTC)

Nope, not gonna get to go because I have too many animals to take along, and can't get anybody to take care of them if I leave them at home... I'm planning on watching it online if possible, and reading all reports as soon as they come out on Sunday morning! I think they're going to bring I Am Jose back and win again, but if not I'll be making an article about the new winner.

Imo, I think the perfect horse stuff is fueled by all the magazines and pony books, which seem to be mainly concerned with just that. Realism doesn't seem to be in demand. White Arabian Filly ^Neigh 20:14, 29 July 2016 (UTC)

Pony books for sure. What floors me is how many magazines, even very respected ones, are reinventing the wheel... didn't all this stuff get taught to them years ago? Though George H. Morris can be really, really, obnoxious, his rants in his (sort-of) retirement about how young people don't even know how to care for their animals does hit home. Montanabw ^(talk) 01:53, 30 July 2016 (UTC)

I imagine a not insignificant portion of the readership of these magazines will be people who are fans and don't actually have livestock themselves, and who find explanations of the basics an interesting glimpse behind the veil rather than a statement of the obvious, in the same way that magazines purportedly aimed at athletes or engineers will include "how to clean your boots" and "what is a rotary engine?" pieces. Given how much of a key demographic for everything farming-related (at least in the developed west) is folks who've moved out of the big cities to the countryside and acquired a smallholding in the process who've never previously owned any animal larger than a cat, one can't take it for granted that readers know anything about livestock. Even in squarely arable country where the only animals I ever see are cattle on the water meadows and the occasional chicken coop the "what do you mean, it's a bad idea to store sacks of ammonium nitrate in the house?" factor is strong; I imagine it's a thousand times worse with horses, since you have a constant stream of little girls who think horses are basically rideable dogs and middle-aged men acting out their cowboy fantasies, all of whom are approaching the subject in absolute good faith but have no background knowledge beyond the "if it has horns, it's not a horse it's a cow" level. ‑ Iridescent 09:20, 30 July 2016 (UTC)

My take is that people have to learn at some point that no, you are not being safe if you ride in a helmet, short shorts and flip flops (yes, I've seen people that dumb), no, you can't just kiss a problem horse on the nose and make him perfect (I once retrained a horse that wouldn't pick up his feet and reared and kicked at the farrier; it took several years and a lot of squished feet on my part). I have a big collection of old magazines, dating back to the late 1960s, and the further back you go the smarter the people were. I don't even buy many recent magazines, because I just don't care about most of this stuff anymore. I have a middle-aged horse who I got as a four or five-year-old (we don't know how old he was), and next time I'm getting one younger than that. I don't want a senior because I basically learned on youngsters, I can't afford one of the fad breeds like Friesians or Gypsy Vanners, and I sure don't want another problem horse. Yet seniors, problem/rescue horses, and the fad breeds like Friesians are all the magazines are about now. White Arabian Filly ^Neigh 20:34, 30 July 2016 (UTC)

Wikidata property for riders' horses

Wikidata now has a property, mount (P3091), for people's horses (or other animals ridden).

Here's a bot-generated report, also showing images of horse and rider. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 17:41, 20 August 2016 (UTC)

Will that work for multiple horses, such as for jockeys? Also, can you explain in really simple terms if we have to do anything special to make wikidata happen? I totally don't understand if it automatically propagates the way Google swipes from Wikipedia, or if we are supposed to do something. All the talk I see on it is so hopelessly techie that I don't get it. Montanabw^(talk) 07:11, 21 August 2016 (UTC)

Important discussion

Important discussion of interest to participants on this project: Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Medicine#Merge WP:VET to WP:MED as a taskforce/workgroup?. Montanabw^(talk) 04:41, 30 August 2016 (UTC)

Wikiproject Horses in wikidata

Hello. We're working on Wikidata to harmonize horse pedigrees : http://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Wikidata:WikiProject_Horses Have fun ! --Tsaag Valren (talk) 08:30, 1 September 2016 (UTC)

well I've signed up as I'm interested in the topic but I haven't got a clue about wikidata so I will have to click my way through a few tutorials before doing anything remotely useful. Tigerboy1966 10:41, 1 September 2016 (UTC)

Thanks to you =). One of the aims of this project is to use all good equine pedigree databases worldwide to create an auto-generated pedigree template for the Wikipedia pages. We will work with the databases who give results of big equine competitions (races, jumping, dressage, etc...) It will be a long, interesting, and difficult job! --Tsaag Valren (talk) 11:29, 1 September 2016 (UTC)

It probably needs to be WikiProject Equine, as we have it here... Montanabw^(talk) 07:08, 4 September 2016 (UTC)

Actually, it might be better to move this to WikiProject Horses, which would be the obvious name for it and that which people are most likely to look for. Why does this project (only?) have an adjective as its title? The dog project is not at WikiProject Canine, the cat project is not at WikiProject Feline, the United States project is not at WikiProject American, the opera project is not at WikiProject Operatic. Why the exception? Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 10:20, 4 September 2016 (UTC)

I guess because it covers mules and donkeys too. White Arabian Filly ^Neigh 18:40, 4 September 2016 (UTC)

Justlettersandnumbers, equine is also a noun.

Yes. Way back when the person (not me) started the project, it was "WikiProject horses" There were two reasons it moved to "Equine." 1) The "ponies are horses too" problem (we have had, over the years, assorted annoying dramas -- the "ponies aren't the same species as horses" drama (easily disposed of but annoying) and the "ponies are just a breed of horse" drama. (And the "is it a horse or a pony?" drama... sigh) 2) At the time, we also had some strong donkey and mule advocates as well as some non-equestrian-but-literally-minded editors. Oh yes, and there are also the Zebra folks. While JLAN's point about cats and dogs is well-taken and JLAN has a point, I think that the sheer number of additional feline and canine species is one way to distinguish this from other projects. The truth is, Equus (genus) is relatively small. We already have all the evolutionary species and extant species under this umbrella and it does not appear to be overwhelming the project. That said, I have sometimes wondered if we should create a donkeys task force so the asinus articles can be tagged and given their own special attention. Montanabw^(talk) 20:27, 4 September 2016 (UTC)

Thunder (horse)

There appears to be a relatively new editor who objects to the photo of the tunnel. I've tried to explain the reason for the photo, but that editor keeps reverting my edits. Considering the article is a FA, and has already been through the review process, I don't understand the objection. ^{Atsme📞📧} 18:27, 16 September 2016 (UTC)

I've watchlisted the article. Seriously, I don't see why they think the picture is a problem. It shows how Thunder gets onto the field, for Pete's sake.😕 White Arabian Filly ^Neigh 20:53, 16 September 2016 (UTC)

SPA on Honors (horse)

Not a surprise due to the controversy over him, but this editor keeps adding stuff that goes against the newspaper sources I used. The Shelbyville Times-Gazette says that the federal case is over with and ruled in McSwain's favor, and that's what I wrote in the article. (He's also named Keith, not Kevin.) But they keep adding stuff that makes it sound like the case is still open, and used pretty strong language accusing the owner (2nd edit). Also, Honors' violation was of the scar rule, and they are saying it was soring; the owners jumped through a lot of hoops to clear their names. page history If they are who their username says, they are a higher-up in one of the most anti-Big Lick/show horse/performance groups out there (I don't think this counts as outing because ...just do a simple Google search of the name, and you'll see). That makes them an SPA with a COI in my view. As for me, I like the horse, but I don't have any connections with him or any humans surrounding him. I really don't need the disruption on this right now either; the article is nominated for DYK and stuff is going on in my real life. I'd appreciate it if somebody else could keep an eye on the article. I also plan to contact the editor and explain the COI policy. White Arabian Filly ^Neigh 21:30, 13 September 2016 (UTC)

I've been out-of-pocket most of the day, but will look in on things tomorrow. ^{Atsme📞📧} 03:26, 14 September 2016 (UTC)

I saw the issue. I'll jump on it as needed. You know I have pretty strong feelings about soring, but I have even stronger feelings about following the sources and sticking with proper citations (dang, guess I'm always the legal thinker first, LOL!) Montanabw^(talk) 03:37, 17 September 2016 (UTC)

I just uploaded....

...this video clip for Horse breeding if you'd like to add it. Also want to mention that I have more clips I can capture from the same documentary which can be used for Sultan's Great Day and possibly others depending on what's needed. For example, I have some training clips, running free clips, horses biting, rearing, etc. I'm waiting for an admin to check what I've already uploaded (local NonFree) to make sure I did it correctly. ^{Atsme📞📧} 21:07, 5 September 2016 (UTC)

Ask them for help on the license, I see they tag-bombed it. Using a cc-3.0 or 4.0 license should do the trick. Once the licensing stuff is squared away, put it in where you think it best and we can move it around some if we need to. Montanabw^(talk) 04:35, 6 September 2016 (UTC)

Montanabw see my TP for the explanation. ^{Atsme📞📧} 05:29, 6 September 2016 (UTC)

Intent to delete

File:Clip breeding-foaling-A Celebration of Horses.webmhd.webm is being considered for deletion. Please see the tags below the image. We only have until September 8th to respond.

^{Atsme📞📧} 22:05, 6 September 2016 (UTC)

UPDATE: The initial decision was to "keep" the clip as it passes the FU criteria uploader's talk page, but another editor has decided it needs more community attention and tagged it for deletion yet again: Wikipedia:Files_for_discussion/2016_September_9#File:Clip_breeding-foaling-A_Celebration_of_Horses.webmhd.webm. ^{Atsme📞📧} 15:09, 9 September 2016 (UTC)

This latest deletion nomination is pretty freaking ridiculous. I voted keep, because he's dead and we can't get any more video. Looks like somebody would get that that's acceptable fair use under the policy. White Arabian Filly ^Neigh 20:29, 9 September 2016 (UTC)

I don't understand it. If WP wanted to exclude all FU media, they wouldn't have the policy. The arguments to delete are fallacious and based on opinions that clearly reflect a lack of knowledge about horses in general, specifically stallions and what quality breeding programs contribute to the advancement of an entire breed of horses. I posted on Montanabw's user page hoping to get some back & forth going about the ambiguities in our FU policy as it relates to media uploads. The "upload police" tend to be overzealous - claiming it's better to err on the side of deletion - which is not helpful to the encyclopedia or its readers. They're deleting rare/historic/highly informative encyclopedic information that would definitely enhance the reading experience. I hope other Project Members get involved in this discussion because as RexxS mentioned, the outcome may help establish a new precedent. Anyway, thanks for staying on top of things, WAF! ^{Atsme📞📧} 15:34, 10 September 2016 (UTC)

Yeah, the silly attitudes are probably why we have so few articles with fair use images, even though so many horse articles in particular are about dead animals. Except for Honors and I Am Jose, and some Olympic horses, all my created horse biography articles are about dead ones. White Arabian Filly ^Neigh 22:12, 10 September 2016 (UTC)

I usually don't have trouble uploading images of deceased horses, I think the trouble with this one was... the "activities" portrayed... LOL! Montanabw^(talk) 03:38, 17 September 2016 (UTC)