Talk:Appaloosa: Difference between revisions

Browse history interactively ← Previous editContent deleted Content addedVisual WikitextInline

Revision as of 20:17, 6 February 2008 editCasliber (talk \| contribs)Edit filter managers, Administrators200,919 edits note← Previous edit		Latest revision as of 04:13, 6 September 2024 edit undoYuchitown (talk \| contribs)Extended confirmed users12,369 edits assess as low
(362 intermediate revisions by 51 users not shown)
Line 1:		Line 1:
			{{Article history
	{{GAonhold\|20:15, 6 February 2008 (UTC)}}.
			\|action1=GAN
	{{WikiProject Horse breeds\|class=B\|importance=mid}}
			\|action1date=02:55, 12 February 2008 (UTC)
	{{talkheader}}
			\|action1result=listed
			\|action1oldid=190794257
			\|action2=PR
			\|action2date=04:27, 27 May 2008
			\|action2link=Misplaced Pages:Peer review/Appaloosa/archive1
			\|action2result=reviewed
			\|action2oldid=214986254
			\|action3=PR
			\|action3date=21:53, 28 December 2010
			\|action3link=Misplaced Pages:Peer review/Appaloosa/archive2
			\|action3result=reviewed
			\|action3oldid=404681445
			\|action4=FAC
			\|action4date=17:10, 30 May 2011
			\|action4link=Misplaced Pages:Featured article candidates/Appaloosa/archive1
			\|action4result=promoted
			\|action4oldid=431672482
			\|topic=Natsci
			\|currentstatus=FA
			\|maindate=October 5, 2012
			}}
			{{WikiProject banner shell\|class=FA\|vital=yes\|1=
			{{WikiProject Indigenous peoples of North America \|importance=low}}
			{{WikiProject Equine\|breeds=yes\|importance=mid}}
			{{WikiProject United States \|importance=low}}
			}}

			{{Archives}}
	==Recent edits and citation format==
	Per the edit history of this article over the past week, I did a little cleanup, keeping what appeared to be the best of some of the word tweaks and new material. Cleaned up and expanded the controversies section, tossed a possibly dubious statement that had been fact tagged for quite a while, other assorted bits and pieces.

			== External links modified ==
	Comment on citations to avoid future edit wars: Overall, wikipedia guidelines prefer footnotes to inline citations, and overall it's best to follow them here. However, for the purpose of links to photographs, given that wikipedia itself has few examples but we want an illustration, I am OK with the inline links at those places only. It's a little awkward to have both forms, but if we consider the inlink links a stopgap measure until wikimedia commons has actual photos we can insert into the article, it works for me.

			Hello fellow Wikipedians,
	Oh, and all you Appy people, get out those digital cameras and start snapping photos of striped, hooves, mottled skin, etc... Misplaced Pages needs your help! (smile) See Commons--upload file for more info. ]<sup>]</sup> 03:07, 11 September 2007 (UTC)

			I have just modified {{plural:1\|one external link\|1 external links}} on ]. Please take a moment to review . If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit ] for additional information. I made the following changes:
	==GA pre-pre review==
			*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20071020202226/http://www.appaloosaassn.co.nz/ to http://www.appaloosaassn.co.nz/

			When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the ''checked'' parameter below to '''true''' or '''failed''' to let others know (documentation at {{tlx\|Sourcecheck}}).
	* Lede. WAYYY short. We want two or three hefty paragraphs here.
	* Citations. Lots of them. For this size I'd expect at least twice this many.
	* Gotta get rid of the external links inside the text of the article. GA will shoot you down asap for that.
	* Popular culture. GA hates these, but you can do them if they are bigger than this one. And you left off John Wayne's black appy that's in a couple of films with him! Might also mention the appy son of Secretariat.
	* Consider starting a ApHC article and move some of that stuff over there. It'll look neater and you can prune some of the external links over there too.
	* Try to expand the first two subsections of the History section. Or combine them. Right now they are so short, they overpower the Nez Perce sections and make them look too big
	* Consider an "influences on other breeds" or "influences from other breeds" section.
	* Uses section. Also explain the costume class they used to have.
	* Im pretty sure the license plate is wrongly tagged on Commons. The tag that is on it only applies to the Federal gov, and the plate is from a state gov.
	* If the weather ever gets warm AND sunny here, I'll trek to the stable and take some shots. Couple of appys there.

			{{sourcecheck\|checked=false}}
	I'm just dead dog tired tonight. I'll try to throw some fact tags at places and throw some citations up tomorrow. And comb over this more thoroughly. It's not that far off, honestly. Clean up clean up clean up. That's the main thing.] \| ] 04:55, 30 January 2008 (UTC)

			Cheers.—] <span style="color:green;font-family:Rockwell">(])</span> 14:15, 16 October 2016 (UTC)
	::OK, get a good night's sleep! What's your position on footnotes in the lead section, and to what extent do you recommend "parroting" info that appears later on? (i.e. taking the first sentence of various sections almost verbatim...Intros are the bane of my existence) ]<sup>]</sup> 05:54, 30 January 2008 (UTC)
	:::I have good luck with taking a sentence from most every paragraph, although it may not be the first sentence. Sometimes I'll chose a particularly juicy piece to put up top. Of course, most of my GAs have been medieval bishops, so juicy is relative. I usually write the lede shortly before i submit to GA. I only footnote direct quotations, and have only had one (out of ten) GA's request a footnote for anything but a quotation in the lede. Thick ledes get you brownie points, when I review. I think 7/8s of the review's I've done have had to have the lede bulked up. They aren't just the bane of your existence. ] \| ] 05:58, 30 January 2008 (UTC)
	::::There is an ApHC article already started. It had been wikilinked farther down the article, but I also wikilinked it when it's first mentioned in the history section. I'm not totally sure what information should be moved over there, but just putting it out there that it does exist. Also, since GA's seem to prohibit in-text photo links, is it allright that I go through and take them all out? Montana, I know you said on your talk page that there'd been an argument over them...but if we want GA? ] (]) 13:59, 30 January 2008 (UTC)
	::::::I'd think the external links to the ApHC affliates would be good over on the ApHC article. Maybe the ApHC site itself too, but that's not quite so big a deal. Also the details on the registration should probably go with the ApHC article, with a cross link to the breed article. ] \| ] 14:59, 30 January 2008 (UTC)
	::::I'm up and going to look over and see what might need fact tags now... don't freak Dana, I'm known for being a pain about things needing fact tags. If it moves, I want it cited! ] \| ] 14:46, 30 January 2008 (UTC)

			== External links modified ==
	More stuff:
	* The "Spotted horse in America" subsection, the last sentence says "Each theory has some historical support." We can expand on that, I hope. A brief statement that about who supports each side and expanding on that wouldn't hurt pad the article out. As it is now it looks skimpy.
	* If we do an influence section, definitely mention the POA being developed from the Appy. Isn't there an Appy Sport horse registry? And the AraAppaloosa?
	More as I think of it. ] \| ] 14:59, 30 January 2008 (UTC)

			Hello fellow Wikipedians,
	Okies, found some articles and my whopping two books on the Appy. I'll try to get some of this stuff into the article this evening. Gotta go run errands first. Whee. ] \| ] 20:52, 30 January 2008 (UTC)
	:And entered. Added some data. There is a GREAT shot of an Appy in a pre-WWI circus tent for the Barnun & Bailey folks that I'll try to scan in soon, as well as a great one of the same time frame in a Roman standing circus act. ] \| ] 00:48, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

			I have just modified 2 external links on ]. Please take a moment to review . If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit ] for additional information. I made the following changes:
	Allright, all in-text photo links are gone (I think, unless I missed one, which is always possible). Also, the registration and external links sections have been fairly well pruned through removal of information to the ApHC article (and the two articles are cross linked). Tomorrow I'll probably work on extrapolating a uses section from all of the various uses mentioned, as well as taking as stab at the lead. Depends on how busy work is as far as how much of this I actually get done! Looking forward to seeing the pics, Ealdgyth... ] (]) 03:07, 31 January 2008 (UTC)
			*Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.appaloosamuseum.org/
	:errp! That means I actually have to do it, huh? I do think I've mined out my books. I do think we should mention the various classes in shows that the ApHC runs that aren't in other breed shows. As I recall they are the keyhole and the costume class, and some others? ] \| ] 03:18, 31 January 2008 (UTC)
			*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110707152446/http://www.appaloosaproject.com/index.php?module=pagemaster&PAGE_user_op=view_page&PAGE_id=34 to http://www.appaloosaproject.com/index.php?module=pagemaster&PAGE_user_op=view_page&PAGE_id=34

			When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
	:::Overall, I like what is happening. I am going to restore the national links, though, because we can hold the line on national organizations (there won't be many) but when there is just one group, then a) All the state clubs start adding their sites, which is an ongoing PITA, and b) the people in other countries start ranting at us for being "American-centric." So letting the clubs in other nations stay seems to, paradoxically, keep down the number of minor club links. I will source the Lewis and Clark quote directly (the actual source was the appy club page, but it IS in the journals, just have to find a set to verify off of), will maybe tweak some other things with appropriate edit summaries to explain what I'm up to. If you guys aren't thrilled, just tweak away. Oh, and on the breeds thing, that is going to be tricky, as you may have noticed, there is a debate over when something is a new "breed" and when it's a marketing ploy for someone's farm. (And why the AraAppaloosa exists is beyond me because ApHC lets in half-Arabs, but oh well...somebody got in a fight with somebody else and took all their marbles to start their own club, I guess.). However, the POA is a definite breed, we need to take a REAL careful look at the rest, which include the Ranger Horse, the Tiger Horse, the "Spanish Jennet Horse" (see that discussion), the Walkaloosa, and god knows what else. There is a part of me that really asks which of these need promotion and which the Appy people wish would just go away...oh yes, and the Nez Perce horse is mentioned in the article, in passing (why people want to cross an Akhal-Teke on an Appy is beyond me, isn't that like crossing a border collie on a coyote = smart AND evil?(grin) I mean, I KNOW someone who has an Appy-Mustang cross and if that horse had an opposable thumb it would take over the planet! ). Anyway, this one is looking like a fun project, though I dread that onslaught that comes with GA nominations... ]<sup>]</sup> 03:55, 31 January 2008 (UTC)
	::::Ranger horse is easy. They trace to Linden Tree and err.. Leopard that President Grant got. Arabians from the desert. That's where the Robards' horses got their spots, one of his foundation dams traced to them, I believe. I'll have to dig... it's somewhere. Whether it's actually sourceable to Misplaced Pages, is another story. It's part of the "QH history files" and very well may be an original letter or communication to me from someone. ] \| ] 04:01, 31 January 2008 (UTC)
	::::Hm.. nope. Same source though. Joker B's dam was Blue Vitrol, who was out of Leopard who was out of a mare by Primero. That Primero daughter's dam was a mare by "Arab" who I think I figured out was "Barnum's Arab" and may possibly be the Leopard that was Grant's. Leopard's certainly quite the suggestive name anyway... ] \| ] 04:29, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

			{{sourcecheck\|checked=false\|needhelp=}}
	:::::Ironically, given Arabian genetics, "Leopard" may have been either a ] or a majorly fleabitten gray! LOL! (Somewhere I think I did read that he was a gray...) ]<sup>]</sup> 06:54, 31 January 2008 (UTC)
	::::::One was supposed to be a Barb, the other was an Arabian. I'm for bed! ] \| ] 06:58, 31 January 2008 (UTC)
	:::::::Yeah, but Barbs didn't have the Leopard gene, either! (LOL). And actually, Leopard WAS an Arab, he has offspring in the AHA studbook (via Anazeh) Linden Tree, though, who knows?? Sources are all over the place on some of this stuff.

			Cheers.—] <span style="color:green;font-family:Rockwell">(])</span> 15:13, 4 May 2017 (UTC)
	:I've found a citation for the last fact tag in the article, so all of those are now gone!!!! I think we've covered all of Ealdgyth's suggestions, except maybe that the first two history sections and the appys in film section are still fairly short. Should we do more to expand these, or perhaps combine the history sections? I think we need to be careful about the film section, as it could easily turn into a listing of every B-list movie that's ever had a spotted horse mentioned, but at the moment it's just...short. Other than this, are we about ready for GA review? ] (]) 18:33, 31 January 2008 (UTC)
	::I took out some more lurking links in the text. We need to standardise the references ] and all that. ] is probably the easiest, as it formats the silly things for you. I think we really should expand those sections a bit. I've still got the pictures to scan too. ] \| ] 20:05, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

			== External links modified ==
	==GA pre-review==
	Starting a new header to make the discussion easier to follow. I really see no harm in a short popular culture section as is (maybe if some famous person owns appys like how William Shatner is into Saddlebreds, we could add that in, or if Appys are sports mascots, like the gray horses all named ] are for for USC, etc. I agree we don't have to list every B western. But I will make it a subheading of "uses" because, really, that's what this is all about. (The uses section could be expanded a bit, I suppose, but it was 1am last night when I tweaked it and my enthusiasm was limited. I hate the ref template, I know eventually I have to care, but that hasn't stopped an article from going GA yet, even the horribly anal-retentive review I endured over at Arabian horse didn't hammer on the citation format (for FA it will matter, I suppose, can't hure to improve cites, but I don't see it as a priority).
	:Well, I just got hammered for it on one of mine, so I'll be glad to go through and clean them up shortly. The other thing we kinda have to do is really go through the prose with a fine tooth comb. No contractions, watch for "however" at the start of sentences, etc. etc. I also ran across a reference in one of the articles to some folks that contest the history of the breed? I don't have anything more than that, sorry. But was there some sort of controversy over Francis Haines' research work at one point? When I go through the references and get them standardized, I'll also check that the web sites are 'reliable'. ] \| ] 22:21, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

			Hello fellow Wikipedians,
	::Oh, ouch. Some of this stuff is so "college kid term paper" but then, I think that encompasesses half the admins and 75% of the GA reviewers. However, it is actually acceptable to begin a sentence with "however." (grin) Nonetheless, the more officially grammatical method is the use of a semicolon; however, this has started any number of minor punctuation edit wars. LOL!! BTW, one of these days when I get to it, I'll find a page cite from the Bennett book.

			I have just modified 7 external links on ]. Please take a moment to review . If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit ] for additional information. I made the following changes:
	::And yeah, spotted some grammar problems and contractions myself, just sort of try and grab a few more every trip through. Not sure which ref has the questioning of history, but tip me off and I'll analyze it and be the bad cop if needed. God knows I "teach the controversy" in these articles often enough, however, if it's like the ], I feel no obligation to include it. Fact-checkin' iz me! ]<sup>]</sup> 04:15, 1 February 2008 (UTC)
			*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130917235539/http://imh.org/index.php/exhibits/online/horse-breeds-of-the-world/north-america/item/2233-appaloosa-horse to http://imh.org/index.php/exhibits/online/horse-breeds-of-the-world/north-america/item/2233-appaloosa-horse
	:::Hey, now. I do lots of GA reviews. Yeah, it's a pain, but it should be at least a bit more formal than conversation. I don't usually get too bent out of shape over the prose, but I dislike short paragraphs. They make things hard to read if there are a lot of one and two sentence paragraphs. Contractions are a big one for a lot of folks. None of the refs in the article question the history, it's in an article I have in my files. It wasn't the topic of the article, it was mentioned in passing. ] \| ] 04:25, 1 February 2008 (UTC)
			*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110707152301/http://www.appaloosaproject.com/index.php?module=pagemaster&PAGE_user_op=view_page&PAGE_id=1&MMN_position=5%3A5 to http://www.appaloosaproject.com/index.php?module=pagemaster&PAGE_user_op=view_page&PAGE_id=1&MMN_position=5%3A5
			*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110515013604/http://www.spanishjennet.org/atigrado.shtml to http://www.spanishjennet.org/atigrado.shtml
			*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080911032453/http://www.usef.org/documents/competitions/2007/2007DrugsMedsGuidelines.pdf to http://www.usef.org/documents/competitions/2007/2007DrugsMedsGuidelines.pdf
			*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20111203070636/http://www.feicleansport.org/2011_Equine_Prohibited_List.pdf to http://www.feicleansport.org/2011_Equine_Prohibited_List.pdf
			*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20121005172453/http://aqha.com/Showing/Content-Pages/Resources/Exhibitors/Guide-to-Showing/Therapeutic-Medication-Fact-Sheet.aspx to http://aqha.com/Showing/Content-Pages/Resources/Exhibitors/Guide-to-Showing/Therapeutic-Medication-Fact-Sheet.aspx
			*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20071231044640/http://www.apha.com/forms/rulebooks.html to http://www.apha.com/forms/rulebooks.html

			When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
	==Citations==
	Are switched to the templates. Blech. Disturb them at your peril.] \| ] 02:08, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

			{{sourcecheck\|checked=false\|needhelp=}}
	:I just owe you a beer for that or something. I promise not to screw up anything you did, though I still might screw up my own edits (But I have a userbox for that, so everyone has been warned! ]<sup>]</sup> 04:07, 1 February 2008 (UTC)
	::I'm guessing you liked the pictures. But none of striped hooves are going to be coming from here, we're snowing, and due to get up to a foot. BLECH! ] \| ] 04:11, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

			Cheers.—] <span style="color:green;font-family:Rockwell">(])</span> 22:44, 19 May 2017 (UTC)
	:::Wuss. We only have about 6 inches of snow here at the moment, but two nights ago it got down to -20 below here! LOL! Actually is snowing again, hope we don't get a foot, but we DO need the moisture. I'm thinking for striped hooves, we could go on a hunt in Flickr or something and look to see if anyone has a free photo to crop (that's how I found the Appy eye one). ]<sup>]</sup> 04:17, 1 February 2008 (UTC)
	:::NOt that I'm scared of the snow, but it's hard to take pictures of hooves when they are not visible in the snow. And the barn is too dark for photographs. So.. we wait. ] \| ] 04:22, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

			== External links modified ==
	::::I tried to shoot a photo of an ermine spot on one of my horses' legs, in the dark, in the barn, after she had stepped in poop, got back in the house looked at what I got, said "to heck with it" and went hunting in commons for leg photos. Found a good one there! LOL! ]<sup>]</sup> 04:38, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

			Hello fellow Wikipedians,
	==GA push==
	I think we're getting close. A bit more expansion, and then I suggest we leave it sit for a couple of days, and then everyone go through it with a fine toothed comb, find all the weirdly phrased sentences, etc. And do a last pass through to make sure we're not overlinking things, and make sure the lead is a good summary.] \| ] 04:34, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

			I have just modified 2 external links on ]. Please take a moment to review . If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit ] for additional information. I made the following changes:
	:Feel free to tweak the lead, I did a bit on it yesterday, but really ran out of gas about saying more without getting into too many details (I personally am a fan of a short lead, but no more than about 3 paras, but that's just me), the lead needs someone who didn't write so much of the content to do it, I think. What else do you think needs to be expanded? My creativity is sort of at a low ebb (had a brushfire today because I raced in on a good faith edit but was too snarky, but the edit needed help and it still was a couple of hours' work) I really don't feel much more needs be added to the ancient history section, I made it sort of the intro to the whole history piece, as that European history chunk would also be true of the Knabstrup and other leopard breeds, thus is "generic" to the Lp gene. I'm open to other ideas, though. ]<sup>]</sup> 04:44, 1 February 2008 (UTC)
			*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20160720013014/http://www.sos.idaho.gov/emblems/ to http://www.sos.idaho.gov/emblems/
	::Let me sleep on it. It's not like I'm going anywhere tomorrow or anything (grins). ] \| ] 04:56, 1 February 2008 (UTC)
			*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100801021051/http://www.myhorse.com/mr-appaloosa.html to http://www.myhorse.com/mr-appaloosa.html
	:::I've had a good read of the article following Montanabw's invitation, and would like to say that it looks really good. It's easy to read and seems comprehensive. So my suggestions now might seem a bit picky, but I offer them for what they're worth.
	:::#I noticed the repetition of "one parent with Lp gene" in the first sentence of two sections (] & ]). They had different refs, too
	:::#] seems quite short for its own section, and there's no ref for the final comment
	:::#Lead paragraph is quite deep and hits a newcomer (well me, anyway) a bit hard; perhaps it says too much, rather than leads in more generally? It's a tricky one: people have different likes; I've met those who hate refs etc there.
	:::#Our reviewer at ] suggested having notes (eg. Bennet, p 4) and then a list of references; personally, I think yours are quite clear, esp as so many are online, but your reviewer might be the same
	:::#there's lots of external links, which at first glance just seems a list of clubs but I understand the rationale given. keeping to national ones is a good idea.
	:::Anyway, that's what occurs to me on a first look. Hope it's helpful. ] (]) 01:07, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

			When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
	:::::I'm taking it up. GA Reviewers usually find something to work on, and I think we are close enough, anything flagged should be something I can hit within 24 hours, or anyone else here can jump in too. I'll look over the Bennett cites a bit and see if there are tweaks there. Good Articles need not be perfect articles. ]<sup>]</sup> 01:00, 6 February 2008 (UTC)

			{{sourcecheck\|checked=false\|needhelp=}}
	== GA review notes ==

			Cheers.—] <span style="color:green;font-family:Rockwell">(])</span> 02:31, 8 July 2017 (UTC)
	OK, I'll post things up as I find them: cheers, ] (] '''·''' ]) 19:30, 6 February 2008 (UTC)

			== External links modified ==
	*''The Appaloosa is a horse breed with preferred characteristics that include coat pattern. It is best known for its leopard spotted coat color and other distinctive physical characteristics, created by the "Lp" or "leopard" gene complex.'' - sits oddly with me, just sorta leaps into things. I'd change to:

			Hello fellow Wikipedians,
	:''The Appaloosa is a horse breed known for its leopard spotted coat color and other distinctive physical characteristics, with the "Lp" or "leopard" gene complex responsible for preferred characteristics that include coat pattern.'' - or something like it.

			I have just modified 3 external links on ]. Please take a moment to review ]. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit ] for additional information. I made the following changes:
	:..''moved into modern times with'' - umm, colloquial. Just remove it and rephrase with the org formed in 1938. cheers, ] (] '''·''' ]) 19:32, 6 February 2008 (UTC)
			*Added archive https://archive.is/20080118212732/http://www.appaloosamuseum.org/cms/default.asp?contentID=521 to http://www.appaloosamuseum.org/cms/default.asp?contentID=521
			*Added archive https://archive.is/20080206014113/http://www.appaloosamuseum.org/cms/default.asp?contentID=524 to http://www.appaloosamuseum.org/cms/default.asp?contentID=524
			*Added archive https://archive.is/20090107024513/http://www.appaloosamuseum.org/cms/famoushorses.asp to http://www.appaloosamuseum.org/cms/famoushorses.asp

			When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
	:I'd just remove the subheading bit '''Spotted horses in the Americas''' and combine the two short sections. cheers, ] (] '''·''' ]) 19:36, 6 February 2008 (UTC)

			{{sourcecheck\|checked=false\|needhelp=}}
	You need to minimise the use of phrases like 'Some scholars/archaeologists/historians believe' bits. I trimmed stuff at the beginning of '''Spotted horses in the Americas''' as an example. The vague extra words weren't adding anything to the materialcheers, ] (] '''·''' ]) 19:40, 6 February 2008 (UTC)

			Cheers.—] <span style="color:green;font-family:Rockwell">(])</span> 18:07, 16 December 2017 (UTC)
	::''the Appaloosa '''as a breed''' had caught the eye of the general public..'' - bolded bit is redundant. If you remove it the sentence still keeps its meaning. cheers, ] (] '''·''' ]) 19:49, 6 February 2008 (UTC)

			== One... ==
	::''A significant crossbreeding influence used to revitalize the Appaloosa was the Arabian horse, '' - ungainly. How about "Appaloosas were crossbred with Arabians to revitalize.." or something. Also need to expain why they wer chosen. typiness? health? etc. cheers, ] (] '''·''' ]) 19:54, 6 February 2008 (UTC)

			It's really bad form to call someone a "bad editor". This is a featured article - it should use high quality sources - not just . Per page from OED, it doesn't appear that the guy is a recognized expert in the etomological field - so he probably doesn't even meet the ] requirement. The origins of the word are actually in the history section with much better sources already - so please gain consensus that the addition meets the high quality requirement for a featured article. ] (]) 17:06, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
	*Use bold rather than caps lock in '''Color and spotting patterns'''.
			:Well, {{u\|Ealdgyth}}, I have to say that it made me smile a little to see one of our absolutely best editors called "bad" for making a good edit. The derivation of the word is surely not as clear-cut or as simple as {{u\|Kazvorpal\|the edit-warring editor}} seems to believe, but perhaps not as straightforward as our article suggests either. Specifically, the (the dictionary of reference for the kind of English I speak) gives it as "... ''Opelousa'', place-name in Louisiana, or ... ''Palouse River'', Idaho, U.S.A.". I don't know what Webster dictionary is online (it looks pretty infantile), but it gives "origin unknown"; my small ''Webster's New Collegiate Dictionary'' gives "... probably from ''Palouse''". We should also probably mention that the word dates from no earlier than 1920. ] (]) 19:00, 7 February 2021 (UTC)

			:: If you think that it's good editing to commit wholesale removal of valid, mainstream content simply because one doesn't like the entirely reasonable source citation, instead of adding some tag for improvement, then you're no judge of who is a good editor. This is a bad habit that originates with Wikilawyering to censor content that an editor doesn't like even though it's true. The actual standard for Misplaced Pages is not wholesale removal unless content is clearly false or irrelevant. As noted above, there's nothing in the etymology I added that's even new to the article, it's just a properly-headlined etymology section to make finding it easier. That relative newbies have normalized wikilawyering is one of the worst things ever to happen to Misplaced Pages. — ] (]) 19:29, 7 February 2021 (UTC)
	*The '''Controversy''' section is cobbled together and artificial. '''Health issues''' should be its own section and any other information can be added to it would be helpful. The '''Color and registration''' controversy needs to be a subsection of '''registration''' as that is what it pertains to. Not sure what it should be called though. '''Drug rules''' should be under a subsection of showing somewhere near '''registration'''. Come to think of it, there is no mention of annual shows etc. in the article -needs one (prizes/awards etc.)
			:::::::Kaz, this is not reliably “valid” and absolutely not “mainstream.” And putting an etymology section first is undue weight when we are talking about an animal. The word origins are properly placed in the history section, as the context matters. (And dude, You’ve only edited about 15 months longer than I havej. ]<sup>]</sup> 04:42, 8 February 2021 (UTC)

			:::The origins of the word “Appaloosa” being derived from the ] and ] is undisputed, except apparently by whatever fool thinks Louisiana or any part of Choctaw country is anywhere close to the Idaho/Washington region. Occasionally, I have seen other theories put out there for other words with origins in the western United States. But this one is... pure nonsense. I would be quite curious where the OED sourced their information. I do wonder if it’s worth looking into the word “Palouse,” as it was not the people’s own name for themselves, like the Sioux/Lakota issue, the popular name was actually derived from some other source entirely. But that is a different rabbit hole. ]<sup>]</sup> 04:10, 8 February 2021 (UTC)
	*In terms of comprehensiveness, as it stands it has a US focus. We have appaloosas here in Australia, and some mention needs to be made of their status/numbers/societies and any differences in the rest of the world.
			{{od}}As a follow up, the most reliable source for the breed name is that of the breed registry that first used the name “Appaloosa”, formed in 1938. unequivocally states, “English-speakers called these horses Palouse horses, or some derivation thereof, after the Palouse River that ran through what was once Nez Perce lands.” People can certainly discuss the etymology of “Palouse” in some article other than this one, but I hope this settles the matter. “A Palouse horse” or “a ‘palousey horse’ became...”Appaloosa.” ]<sup>]</sup> 04:39, 8 February 2021 (UTC)

			:Assuming all of that is correct, it only proves my central point, which is that removing the entire Etymology section ''was bad editing'', the correct course of action would be to fix it. As usual, improving the article does not mean removing, wholesale, parts that need to be improved. That bad habit, as I said, originates with editors of bad motivation, who didn't want George Bush's drug charges in an article, or Clinton's sexual assault, or whatever. That relative newcomers have gotten the false impression this is the normal and proper way to edit the site is a degredation of editing standards. — ] (]) 22:24, 10 February 2021 (UTC)

			::Kaz, you are criticizing an editor who is an admin with over a decade of experience here. Plus she was on the team that made this a featured article. Your etymology section might be useful for the ] article, as to the origins of that word, but not here. The origin of the name is explained in the article, and the Appaloosa Horse Club is the definitive source on the history of their decision to use the “Appaloosa” moniker as opposed to “Palousey” or “Palouse horse” or whatever other options were once under consideration. To the extent that the OED is cautious, that’s their job, but even they know better than to put a Choctaw origin to a Pacific Northwest name. ]<sup>]</sup> 20:01, 21 February 2021 (UTC)
	To summarise, you've done a good job with the flow of the prose, it needs some copyediting (some of which I've done already and noted some more stuff to do above). ] is a good example of a breed article to aim for which is a current FA.

Latest revision as of 04:13, 6 September 2024

Appaloosa is a featured article; it (or a previous version of it) has been identified as one of the best articles produced by the Misplaced Pages community. Even so, if you can update or improve it, please do so.

This article appeared on Misplaced Pages's Main Page as Today's featured article on October 5, 2012.

Article milestones
Date	Process	Result
February 12, 2008	Good article nominee	Listed
May 27, 2008	Peer review	Reviewed
December 28, 2010	Peer review	Reviewed
May 30, 2011	Featured article candidate	Promoted
Current status: Featured article

This

level-5 vital article is rated FA-class on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale.
It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Indigenous peoples of North America Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Indigenous peoples of North America, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Native Americans, Indigenous peoples in Canada, and related indigenous peoples of North America on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Indigenous peoples of North AmericaWikipedia:WikiProject Indigenous peoples of North AmericaTemplate:WikiProject Indigenous peoples of North AmericaIndigenous peoples of North America
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Equine Mid‑importance

	Horses portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Equine, a collaborative effort to improve Misplaced Pages's coverage of articles relating to horses, asses, zebras, hybrids, equine health, equine sports, etc. Please visit the project page for details or ask questions at the barn.EquineWikipedia:WikiProject EquineTemplate:WikiProject Equineequine
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by Horse breeds task force.

United States Low‑importance

This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions.

United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States

Low

This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Archives

Archive 1

Archive 2

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Appaloosa. 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/20071020202226/http://www.appaloosaassn.co.nz/ to http://www.appaloosaassn.co.nz/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 14:15, 16 October 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Appaloosa. 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:

Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.appaloosamuseum.org/
Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110707152446/http://www.appaloosaproject.com/index.php?module=pagemaster&PAGE_user_op=view_page&PAGE_id=34 to http://www.appaloosaproject.com/index.php?module=pagemaster&PAGE_user_op=view_page&PAGE_id=34

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 15:13, 4 May 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 7 external links on Appaloosa. 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:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 22:44, 19 May 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 02:31, 8 July 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Appaloosa. 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:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 18:07, 16 December 2017 (UTC)

One...

It's really bad form to call someone a "bad editor". This is a featured article - it should use high quality sources - not just "sufficiently reliable". Per this "about me" page from OED, it doesn't appear that the guy is a recognized expert in the etomological field - so he probably doesn't even meet the WP:RS requirement. The origins of the word are actually in the history section with much better sources already - so please gain consensus that the addition meets the high quality requirement for a featured article. Ealdgyth (talk) 17:06, 6 February 2021 (UTC)

Well, Ealdgyth, I have to say that it made me smile a little to see one of our absolutely best editors called "bad" for making a good edit. The derivation of the word is surely not as clear-cut or as simple as the edit-warring editor seems to believe, but perhaps not as straightforward as our article suggests either. Specifically, the OED (the dictionary of reference for the kind of English I speak) gives it as "... Opelousa, place-name in Louisiana, or ... Palouse River, Idaho, U.S.A.". I don't know what Webster dictionary is online here (it looks pretty infantile), but it gives "origin unknown"; my small Webster's New Collegiate Dictionary gives "... probably from Palouse". We should also probably mention that the word dates from no earlier than 1920. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 19:00, 7 February 2021 (UTC)

If you think that it's good editing to commit wholesale removal of valid, mainstream content simply because one doesn't like the entirely reasonable source citation, instead of adding some tag for improvement, then you're no judge of who is a good editor. This is a bad habit that originates with Wikilawyering to censor content that an editor doesn't like even though it's true. The actual standard for Misplaced Pages is not wholesale removal unless content is clearly false or irrelevant. As noted above, there's nothing in the etymology I added that's even new to the article, it's just a properly-headlined etymology section to make finding it easier. That relative newbies have normalized wikilawyering is one of the worst things ever to happen to Misplaced Pages. — Kaz (talk) 19:29, 7 February 2021 (UTC)

Kaz, this is not reliably “valid” and absolutely not “mainstream.” And putting an etymology section first is undue weight when we are talking about an animal. The word origins are properly placed in the history section, as the context matters. (And dude, You’ve only edited about 15 months longer than I havej. Montanabw 04:42, 8 February 2021 (UTC)

The origins of the word “Appaloosa” being derived from the Palouse people and geographic area is undisputed, except apparently by whatever fool thinks Louisiana or any part of Choctaw country is anywhere close to the Idaho/Washington region. Occasionally, I have seen other theories put out there for other words with origins in the western United States. But this one is... pure nonsense. I would be quite curious where the OED sourced their information. I do wonder if it’s worth looking into the word “Palouse,” as it was not the people’s own name for themselves, like the Sioux/Lakota issue, the popular name was actually derived from some other source entirely. But that is a different rabbit hole. Montanabw 04:10, 8 February 2021 (UTC)

As a follow up, the most reliable source for the breed name is that of the breed registry that first used the name “Appaloosa”, formed in 1938. The ApHc unequivocally states, “English-speakers called these horses Palouse horses, or some derivation thereof, after the Palouse River that ran through what was once Nez Perce lands.” People can certainly discuss the etymology of “Palouse” in some article other than this one, but I hope this settles the matter. “A Palouse horse” or “a ‘palousey horse’ became...”Appaloosa.” Montanabw 04:39, 8 February 2021 (UTC)

Assuming all of that is correct, it only proves my central point, which is that removing the entire Etymology section was bad editing, the correct course of action would be to fix it. As usual, improving the article does not mean removing, wholesale, parts that need to be improved. That bad habit, as I said, originates with editors of bad motivation, who didn't want George Bush's drug charges in an article, or Clinton's sexual assault, or whatever. That relative newcomers have gotten the false impression this is the normal and proper way to edit the site is a degredation of editing standards. — Kaz (talk) 22:24, 10 February 2021 (UTC)

Kaz, you are criticizing an editor who is an admin with over a decade of experience here. Plus she was on the team that made this a featured article. Your etymology section might be useful for the Palouse article, as to the origins of that word, but not here. The origin of the name is explained in the article, and the Appaloosa Horse Club is the definitive source on the history of their decision to use the “Appaloosa” moniker as opposed to “Palousey” or “Palouse horse” or whatever other options were once under consideration. To the extent that the OED is cautious, that’s their job, but even they know better than to put a Choctaw origin to a Pacific Northwest name. Montanabw 20:01, 21 February 2021 (UTC)

Categories: