Aren't Appaloosa's smarter than the average horse? Can this be added? — Rlevse • Talk • 02:54, 28 January 2010 (UTC)
I actually got around to taking a few photos this afternoon. They're not the greatest (it's getting cold, they're getting their winter coats), but I got a few decent ones. I would like to replace the image of the sclera and the image of the mottling with one image showing both. Here's one of the ones that I got:
, but if there's something wrong with that one or you guys have a better one I'm all ears. The article gets a little crowded with images in the middle - we're not supposed to have text sandwiched between images - and combining two into one might help. Dana boomer ( talk) 19:27, 12 November 2010 (UTC)
Question: How good/bad is allbreed for a source at FA? Pedigree of Red Eagle: http://www.allbreedpedigree.com/red+eagle4 (How the heck that horse is a more-than half-Arab, he sure is plain...they sure put real butts on 'em back in those days, though! (grin)) be nice to throw it in. Montanabw (talk) 04:14, 14 November 2010 (UTC)
I like most of the images we have, but I know we are reviewing them too. If needed, Flickr now has a pretty good collection (275) of images tagged by uploaders as CC-commerical, etc. I'm not that good at understanding how the copyright stuff works, so I didn't upload anything to Commons until or unless we think we can use one -- but some of these, or at least other images of the same horse -- ARE already in commons ( http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:Appaloosa ) . But FYI if you think some will pass muster if we have headaches with what's in there, we have more to draw from than in the past. Montanabw (talk) 20:24, 7 December 2010 (UTC)
A couple of them stood out for me.
FYI, the user on Flickr "Just Chaos" has TONS of horse images (like 2000!), but with a slightly weird dual licensing tag -- Ealdgyth or Dana, can you guys determine if this is an OK one? It's a gold mine for WPEQ if OK!
Ok, this is really bad. The claim of paleolitic spotted horses is countered in the source with this: However, current studies indicate that rather than representing actual horses the cave artists used the spots to represent dreams or visions. This is contrary to what this article claimed before I removed it. -- Kim van der Linde at venus 21:31, 10 December 2010 (UTC)
OK, campers, taking a stab at Kim's idea to do a chart of the coat patterns. If it works we might want to add this to the article in place of the text that's there, but it's open to discussion (Does FA review get crabby at charts the way they do galleries?) I'm a noob at charts, I cribbed this from another article with no clue how the markup works, so help definitely needed: Montanabw (talk) 08:27, 11 December 2010 (UTC)
The coat color of an Appaloosa is a combination of a base color with a overlaid spotting pattern. The base colors recognized by the Appaloosa Horse Club include bay, black, chestnut, palomino, buckskin, cremello or perlino, roan, gray, dun and grulla. Appaloosa markings have several pattern variations. [1] It is this unique group of spotting patterns, collectively called the "leopard complex," [2] that most people associate with the Appaloosa horse. [1] Spots overlay darker skin, and often are surrounded by a "halo," where the skin next to the spot is also dark but the overlying hair coat is white. [3] Spots are not to be confused with dapples, a circular shade variation within a single coat color, most often seen on gray horses. citation needed
It is not always easy to predict a grown Appaloosa's color at birth. Foals in general tend to be born with coats that darken when they shed their baby hair. [4] Further, Appaloosa foals do not always show classic leopard complex characteristics at birth. [2] Patterns sometimes change over the course of the horse's life. Some horses are born with a pattern that does not change, particularly blanket and leopard horses. Others, particularly the varnish roan and snowflake patterns, will be born showing very little color pattern, but develop more color as they get older. [3]
In addition, the ApHC recognizes the concept of a "Solid" horse which has a base color, "but no contrasting color in the form of an Appaloosa coat pattern." Solid horses can be registered if they have mottled skin and one other leopard complex characteristic. [1]
Base color are overlain by various spotting patterns, which are variable and often do not fit neatly into a specific category. [1] These patterns are described as follows:
Pattern | Description | Image [5] |
Blanket or snowcap |
A solid white area normally over, but not limited to, the hip area with a contrasting base color. [1] [6] |
![]() |
Spots | general term that refers to a horse which has white or dark spots over all or a portion of its body. [1] |
![]() |
Blanket with spots | a white blanket which has dark spots within the white. The spots are usually the same color as the horse's base color. [1] |
![]() |
Leopard | Considered an extension of a blanket to cover the whole body. A white horse with dark spots that flow out over the entire body. [6] |
|
Few Spot Leopard | A mostly white horse with a bit of color remaining around the flank, neck and head. [6] |
![]() |
Snowflake | A horse with white spots, flecks, on a dark body. Typically the white spots increase in number and size as the horse ages. [6] |
![]() |
Appaloosa Roan, Varnish roan or Marble |
A distinct version of the leopard complex. Intermixed dark and light hairs with lighter colored area on the forehead, jowls and frontal bones of the face, over the back, loin and hips. Darker areas may appear along the edges of the frontal bones of the face as well and also on the legs, stifle, above the eye, point of the hip and behind the elbow. The dark points over bony areas are called "varnish marks" and distinguish this pattern from a traditional roan. [1] [6] |
![]() |
Mottled | A fewspot leopard that is completely white with only mottled skin showing. [6] |
![]() |
Roan Blanket or Frost |
Horses with roaning over the croup and hips. The blanket normally occurs over, but is not limited to, the hip area. [1] [6] |
![]() |
Roan Blanket With Spots | refers to a horse with a roan blanket which has white and/or dark spots within the roan area. [1] |
![]() |
Best actual roan blanket is this horse, but fuzzy, low quality image. Thoughts?
Oh and, hurrah! Sponenberg at 153-156 has PHOTOS! We can't use his, obviously, but we CAN now cite examples without my OR (and we may need to tweak mine some... help??) Montanabw (talk) 08:32, 13 December 2010 (UTC)
The images are okay except for File:AppaloosaMrGloJangles.jpg (right). Located at http://www.flickr.com/photos/silvermoonapps/371842872/, the caption states "Mr Glo Jangles, Charlie and Gi Gi's sire!" This photograph is also available at Munson Elite Stables, who have a larger version of http://www.flickr.com/photos/silvermoonapps/371842873/.
The Stables are run by Jerry and Kelly Munson. [1] bankerssilvermoon is definitely not Kelly, nor is Jerry her husband. [2] Her signature is definitely not Munson either. [3]
Unlike the rest of bankerssilvermoon's uploads, the photographs of Mr Glo Jangles do not have the camera model data and are much smaller in size (those with the camera model data are 2 or more times larger). The caption (that the horse is the sire to the horses owned by bankerssilvermoon), the size, and the missing data lend support to my belief that Mr Glo Jangles' photographs are not copyrighted to bankerssilvermoon. I believe the photographs are a set of publicity (or advertising) pictures of the stallion in question. It appears that Mr Glo Jangles is reared and maintained by Patti Bertram [4] of Patti's Show Horses. [5] Jappalang ( talk) 02:52, 17 December 2010 (UTC)
OK, now I'm throwing things. I was double-checking some of the old sources now that Kim found that the Appaloosa Museum updated their site from where it was in 2007 or whenever it was last checked (which was a good thing), and discovered our ref "Identity" has also changed, ApHC seems to have dumped "leopard" "varnish roan" and such terms in favor of less colorful but more descriptive terms. So I tweaked the list accordingly. The blockquote section is verbatim, so to avoid copyvio, not sure if I need to add more disclaimers explaining that I used ApHC's exact wording for a reason. I also went through the entire 2010 rule book with various word searches and the rulebook doesn't mention any of the patterns, anywhere. The web side says, tantalizingly, that the "registration department" might use different terms. But a search of the web site came up with nothing. The old terms are still in widespread use, though, so I think they need to stay if we can source them. This does, of course, completely screw up the chart above that I just spend two hours on... Did I say PHOOEY!!!! (I'm actually saying other words out loud, but can't say those here! LOL!) I'm going to look at some Google books, but I'm home on the dialup, which hates Google books, and I'm going to have to have a real life tomorrow, so might not be online for a bit once I'm done tonight. I'm off to see if I can get past the tantalizing examples here and find actual content. Montanabw (talk) 06:36, 11 December 2010 (UTC) Follow up:OK, done. Fixed. Sourced. Everyone else can now tweak away. I am just tweaking =:-O Thank god I only needed five pages out of Sponenberg and it all loaded on Google books. Now I'm going to bed! Montanabw (talk) 08:12, 11 December 2010 (UTC)
Lp is not an allele. It is a gene in the context of classical genetics. The gene in molecular genetics is TRPM1. Maybe someone can fix it. -- Kim van der Linde at venus 14:53, 13 December 2010 (UTC)
--It's a direct quotation from ref name="2007 ApHC"/ which is cited at the end of that very sentence. Do we need it in there twice in the same sentence? --MTBW
--Because other horses have white stripes on their hooves if they have white feet with ermine spots, Appy feet are distinct from that... I think that's how the source worded it, I'll tweak a little. --MTBW
-- I explained it, hopefully better, still within what the "Identify" source says --MTBW
--Dumbed the color stuff down, the registration stuff is explained later in the article, I put "regular" in quotes to identify it as a term of art. --MTBW
--Yes we did, first sentence, but I'll put the word "core" up there too. Montanabw (talk) 04:37, 27 March 2011 (UTC)
--OK--MTBW
--Wording suggestion exceeds the source. Rule 205, quote: " No horse shall be registered with the ApHC that has draft, pony, Pinto, or Paint breeding." ApHC would say that spotted draft horses and spotted ponies have leopard complex genetics, but they are NOT Appaloosas (even if someone can find a pony or a Percheron in old pedigree records)
--Bennett's book was based quite a bit on her independent research, I think, and it would have been history of the west coast, not the east. Basically, the deal is that they were dumped on the west coast (how the hell they got them that far alive, I don't know) not the east coast. Hence, how they wound up as Indian ponies. I'll see what else I can dig up, why is it that after leaving Bennett out for months, I finally put it away only to need to drag it out again almost immediately? ARRGH!--MTBW ---Follow up Google books has parts of Conquerors online here by the way, what's the proper way to add a Google Books link to the citation here? Maybe we should. Her info on this topic is page 391, definitely she says they were shipped "Mexico, California and Oregon." She doesn't footnote, there is a bibliography in the book, though. --MTBW
Yes it was, first in the lede and then in "History" -- "Revitalization." However, if you missed that, others will too, so I'll just say it again. --MTBW
Checklinks report - have some dead links. Ealdgyth - Talk 21:59, 26 March 2011 (UTC)
Follow up' Took a whack at the war section and chopped a bit. Hope that helped. What is left seems relevant -- the journey and its raw distance makes the detail significant...the Appy people actually used have a ride that retraced parts of this route each year, I think. The route is a Big Deal. If you think other stuff is irrelevant, let me know and I'll either chop some more or give you my always-reticent opinion why it needs to stay! ;-) Montanabw (talk) 21:55, 8 April 2011 (UTC)
I don't know how to fix those. Do they actually matter? I don't see any OCLC numbers in the refs, just ISBN (?) If you know what has to be done, you can do it, or tell me what needs to be dug up and I can try to fix. For Sponenberg, I used this, which has no OCLC listed and I just checked the ISBN, it's correct. I don't have Stanger, though looks like there is a copy here in town if you need me to look at something in it??? Montanabw (talk) 21:34, 8 April 2011 (UTC)
And:
Only one Sponenberg here, but I suppose others could be added, so clarified it was the 2003 book we have listed in the refs. I'm not sure the best way to source that, I said "based on" because basically the images in Sponenberg are all copyrighted where he says, for example, "this is an example of the snowflake pattern," so we have been trying to find ones in wiki that resemble those in Sponenberg's photos. If it should just be a ref that sayd "Sponenberg 2003, pp 153-156" with no other verbiage, feel free to just fix that however it needs to be fixed. Or tell me what to do. This isn't my strong suit. Montanabw (talk) 21:34, 8 April 2011 (UTC)
I was invited a few days ago to comment on this article. I'm not sure how welcome my comments are likely to be at the moment, nor indeed how welcome they have been in the past. But there's one rather obvious thing here that you might like to look at: the sclera cannot be "around" the eye, since the sclera is a part of the eye.
If you would like me to read the article carefully for other possible errors, I'd be happy to do so.
Justlettersandnumbers (
talk)
22:32, 8 April 2011 (UTC)
So, I've read this article a couple of times. IMO the sclera thing needs fixing in all of the 3 or 4 places it comes up. Questions: is the sclera always white in this breed? is the iris smaller than usual, or the eye-surround larger? or in other words, why does the sclera show?
Some other random criticisms, intended only to be constructive/helpful:
This is fairly comical reading, but detailed and presumably fairly reliable. The three Appaloosa stallions imported by Freddie Nielsen are near the end.
This is someone who is marketing Knabstrupper x Appaloosa or other crosses as Knabstruppers; the history is mostly copied from the Danish site, Nielsen and his 3 stallions are there. Did anyone read
this to check there's no useful extra info in it?
Justlettersandnumbers (
talk)
11:46, 22 April 2011 (UTC)
(After edit conflict) That IS some interesting material. As you can see, I asked Ealdgyth to see if that Danish site will pass WP:RS. The bit in Lynghaug is rather interesting, and it does back the spotted horses from Europe material we have from Bennett. But much of it may be more suited to the Tiger horse article -- given Ealdgyth's comments and also that "Tiger Horse" association is kind of over-romanticized to the point of (IMHO) goofiness, I think I'd like to see the actual underlying source material to use here -- Lynghaug seems to be as more-or-less reliable as any of the other breed encyclopedias, but looks like some material comes directly from the Tiger horse association without critical analysis -- what I caught was that it has some aspects of the Nez Perce War history wrong, and the use of "Ni Mii Pu" for the Nez Perce is rather "precious" -- sort of like a German calling himself a "Deutschlander" when speaking English -- the people call themselves "Nez Perce" in everyday conversation and use Nimiipuu more for internal tribal use --it's a long story and you kind of have to live out here to get it, but Indian people generally tend to have a bit of irritation (amount varies) with academics who treat them like anthropological studies and overdo the political correctness beyond what they themselves ask; it can be viewed as condescending. Some use the term "culture vulture" to describe people prone to such things. Or, as one Native American Studies prof I know explained it, "We're OK if you call us 'Indians,' we're just glad Columbus wasn't trying to find Turkey!" :-D Montanabw (talk) 19:25, 22 April 2011 (UTC)
--Yes. The Nez Perce nation, at the moment, does not use the accented form: http://www.nezperce.org/ Also, we say it "Nez Purse", not "Nez Per-say", hence, as the French pronunciation appears to have vanished from contemporary use, so, apparently, did the accent. Montanabw (talk) 17:12, 18 April 2011 (UTC)
--Will look at that. --MTBW Fix? Lp comes independent of the Appaloosa breed, there clearly are other breeds with that color that stayed behind in Europe, even after they became unfashionable! Source cited uses "Knabstrupper" and makes references to a bunch of other quasi-historical stuff that is dicey and we have better sources. They also do mention the Norkier (Pinzgauer), I tweaked the section, and moved the European breeds up to the history section where it's more relevant. See what all of you think
--It's not in that tribal article much, and undoubtably the people working on that article would complain that their horse breeding was undue weight if I moved it there, sigh... but to the point, the breed is intertwined thoroughly with the tribal history, particularly of the 1870s, and the big deal was that a 1200 mile flight was possible because these horses are tough as nails. (There is also a joke out here that the Nez Perce were such good fighters because after traveling all that way on Appies, they were so seriously pissed at the horses that they were more than ready to fight with something less challenging, like the US Army!) --MTBW
--Will check. --MTBW Follow up: Found a review of the Haines book, which appears to have been the source. While Haines' research on the Nez Perce appears to be excellent for its time (1960s), he was criticized even then for his weaknesses in palentology: "To include the spotted horses from Peche-Merle, which were not Equus caballus but an extinct Pleistocene variety, is disturbing without an explanation of their relationship to modern spotted horses." Jay D. Frierman, Pacific Historical Review, Vol. 32, No. 4 (Nov., 1963), p. 421 Ealdgyth, do you have Haines? If not, I may need to trot over to the MHS and see if they have a copy; this may also have been Bennett's source for the Europe-to-West-Coast theory. Montanabw (talk) 20:47, 22 April 2011 (UTC)
Hope some of this is helpful,
Justlettersandnumbers (
talk)
12:32, 16 April 2011 (UTC)
Just the ISBN issues and the gaited horses site to fix... Ealdgyth - Talk 00:33, 16 April 2011 (UTC)
Note: Possible backup sources if needed (not great, but independent of the horse crowd), [7] (they cite Ga Wa Ni Pony Boy, :-P but still...) Montanabw (talk) 18:47, 26 April 2011 (UTC) Backup source on the color rule controversy: [8] Montanabw (talk) 17:47, 27 April 2011 (UTC)
Starting a new header because the discussion has moved away from the sclera into other things. Just spend some time in JSTOR and some scientific databases and can't find anything on any studies of gaitedness in spotted horses that supports the Tiger Horse registry claims. Found a couple reviews of the Haines book, one with some useful info that I may re-add to the article. If no one objects, I don't think we want to venture into the rabbit hole that Tiger horse piece opens up of verifying Indian legends and wild west myth, it could be a long slog. I would like to see if we can properly verify that a few Appies have been sent back to Europe to revitalize the Knabstrup(per), though. Anyone able to help?? Montanabw (talk) 20:40, 22 April 2011 (UTC) Follow up(Edit conflict) JLAN and E, I'll add a wee bit on the Knabs, we already do have a link, somewhat obscure, to the Tiger Horse down in the "Uses" section where we discuss the various crossbreds. Montanabw (talk) 20:52, 22 April 2011 (UTC)
I guess this fits under 'historical stuff' - there seems to be an inconsistency. In the third paragraph under "Breed Characteristics", it states: "The old-type Appaloosa was later modified by the addition of draft horse blood after the 1877 defeat of the Nez Perce, when U.S. Government policy forced the Indians to become farmers and provided them with draft horse mares to breed to existing stallions." However, in the first paragraph under "Aftermath of the Nez Perce War", it states the Nez Perce : "... were required by the Army to breed what mares they still had to draft horse stallions in an attempt to create farm horses." So did the Army/Government provide them with draft stallions or draft mares? I don't want to edit it because I don't know which one is correct. Ruralgal ( talk) 02:19, 23 April 2012 (UTC)
If anyone wants to expand the Uses section to add a bit on international use, this may help: http://www.aphcuk.org/web/aphcuk/ulinks.cfm?c=59 However, I am fried, and RL is going to be getting nuts on me starting next week and going into late May, so while I will take the time needed to help shepherd through FA if we take it up, I am too fried to create or add much new material, wordsmithing is all you can hope for... Montanabw (talk) 21:28, 22 April 2011 (UTC)
It's not the international use that seems to be missing IMO, it's the international POV. The horse is registered in a number of ways in a number of countries, Germany, Australia, Italy and Britain among them, I think. It is a world horse. However laughable the idea of a British Appaloosa (pure farce IMO), it is, like the Tiger Horse, an alternative take on what an Appaloosa should or could be, and perhaps deserves a passing mention. Otherwise this will just be another of those articles that takes the dominant breed registry as gospel without considering minority views. If the ISBNs still need work I can do that, assuming it's just a matter of matching the ISBNs to the editions cited;
this catalogue and
this one make that a very easy task, but you'd need to tell me which ones seem to be wrong. The sclera thing still needs fixing; the sclera can't be round the eye because the sclera is a part of the eye. IMO it is TMI on the picture caption anyway.
Justlettersandnumbers (
talk)
10:05, 27 April 2011 (UTC)
Well, we agree on one thing at least, the FAO's numbers; a whole bowl of salt, not just a grain, if you ask me. Seems they count as Laurens Van Der Post says baboons do, "One, two, a HELL of a lot!". For the rest, you have expressed exactly my concern, just rather better than I was able to. For as long as this article remains about "a specific subset of spotted horses" registered under the name "Appaloosa" by one breed registry, it will continue to fail to be encyclopaedic, continue to fail to represent minority views and continue to fail to be neutral. Where in wikipedia, under what title, should the article for those Dutch Appaloosa horses be created if they are to be excluded from the Appaloosa article because they don't meet somebody else's definition of what an Appaloosa ought to be? If the Dutch society is not affiliated to the ApHC, all the more reason to make sure it is included IMO. As far as I am aware (and as you know, that is not very far), the ApHC does not own the name "Appaloosa"; if it does, no doubt it will soon establish that ownership in the courts. Once it has done so, it would be reasonable to limit the scope of this article to horses registered with that one association under that name. But until then, it is not. The aim here is not to represent things as they ought to be, or as one particular association says they ought to be, but as they are, would you not agree?
Justlettersandnumbers (
talk)
18:29, 30 April 2011 (UTC)
I fiddled with the cosmetic layout of the coat colour chart, as the left-hand column looked a bit cramped. Montana rightly comments that the first two rows of the chart now look rather empty. That is because the Spots picture is very tall. That could easily be fixed by moving Leopard and Fewspot leopard to the top of the chart, if no-one has any objection? But that is just cosmetics. What's bothering me more at the moment is that the more I look at the Spots picture the more I see a Blanket with spots horse. As everyone knows, I know a good deal less than nothing about these horses; but to the uneducated eye, it's just a better Blanket-with-spots pic than the other one.
Justlettersandnumbers (
talk)
10:03, 30 April 2011 (UTC)
The gene is called LP throughout the article. That seems to be widely used, but is at variance with what is written at
Leopard complex#The Lp gene. Any particular reason?
Justlettersandnumbers (
talk)
10:54, 30 April 2011 (UTC)
Wrong. It is at least five closely similar breeds, at least three of them in North America alone. If this article is to be about "the Appaloosa horse as defined by the ApHC alone" then you had better move it to a name that reflects that narrow-minded and blinkered view. Maybe someone else will write an article about the Appaloosa as a world horse.
Justlettersandnumbers (
talk)
15:15, 2 May 2011 (UTC)
A couple of quick replies:
Re remarks by Ealdgyth above:
Re remarks by Pesky above: you may be right that I am wrong on this, I've been wrong on several things recently, including believing that contributing to this project was going to be a pleasant experience marked by stimulating intellectual dialogue, exchange of views and collaboration with like-minded editors etc. etc., you get the picture. I'm afraid you lost me a bit with yer Cleveland Bay, I wasn't aware that there were multiple registers for that breed. Anyway, convincing me I'm wrong here is quite straightforward: it just involves showing beyond reasonable doubt that the AApA, the APHCC, the FAHR, the British Appaloosa Society and that Dutch one either don't exist or, if they do, that they don't register enough horses to be considered in any way significant. That shouldn't be too hard for a couple of them, but I fear it may be quite tough to make the Canadian one go away.
Justlettersandnumbers (
talk)
00:15, 7 May 2011 (UTC)
We should probably put in something about the international registration options, including a mention that some registries are not affiliated with the ApHC. Ealdgyth - Talk 13:40, 6 May 2011 (UTC)
(undent) Proposed text and references:
There are other "Appaloosa" registries not affiliated with the ApHC for horses with leopard complex genetics. These registries tend to have different foundation breeding and histories than the North American Appaloosa. [7] [8] However, the ApHC is by far the largest Appaloosa horse registry as the third-largest light horse breed registry in the world, [9] and it hosts one of the world's largest breed shows. [10]
APstudies
was invoked but never defined (see the
help page).Sponenberg90
was invoked but never defined (see the
help page).Thoughts/comments? Feel free to tweak/rewrite, Dana boomer ( talk) 14:11, 11 May 2011 (UTC)
The sourcing for Stanger's 50 years of Appaloosa history on the article doesn't correspond with this, which comes up in WorldCat for the ISBN: http://www.worldcat.org/search?qt=wikipedia&q=isbn%3A0966116046 Can/should someone fix? Montanabw (talk) 20:04, 12 May 2011 (UTC)
Follow up: MHS Says "Publisher's Press" same as WorldCat, may want to tweak that (if we have to go to the hard copy, this is where I'll find it..) And still the question mark,. Edith Stanger appears to have her own web site, which is out of Idaho Falls, but I suppose its OR for us to synthesize. Montanabw (talk) 21:02, 12 May 2011 (UTC)
Beautiful, great horses. PumpkinSky talk 23:57, 10 July 2011 (UTC)
what age do the spots appear on foals? or are they born with them?? Just had a foal and is black all over! will she get her spots?? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 94.11.106.140 ( talk) 16:06, 13 July 2012 (UTC)
Would it be worthwhile to add a section on famous owners of appaloosas, or appaloosas in popular culture? Paul McCartney and his former wife Linda Eastman had several of these. I saw them on his farm in Kent, England, and he mentioned them in the news at the time of Linda's death. There is a reference here but no doubt a better source can be found for the same thing. -- Storye book ( talk) 13:09, 5 October 2012 (UTC)
The article states in part: "... the Nez Perce people of what today is the United States Pacific Northwest developed the original American breed." This page and several other pages related to the Nez Perce tribe (e.g., pages about towns within the present reservation) suggest that the Appaloosas were deliberately bred by the Nez Perce to produce the resulting breed. I was raised on the reservation and the consensus position of all tribal members I asked about this issue were adequately summed up by my high school football coach: "We pretty much left that up to the horses." Moreover, the nature of Nez Perce tribal life tends to confirm that. The Nez Perce at the relevant times were nomadic bands with only small levels of interaction. This fact is incompatible with the notion that they had a deliberate tribal horse breeding program. So unless an authoritative source can be found that says otherwise, language suggesting that the Nez Perce had a breeding program needs to be removed. The Appaloosa evolved; it was not bred. Marbux ( talk) 14:02, 26 December 2012 (UTC)
Interesting report on UK TV last night about a New Zealand breeder who trekked into Kyrgyzstan looking for spotted horses after seeing one on TV. The genetics of these horses appear to be the same as known Appaloosa genetics, and the meet the "Appaloosa visual tests" explained in the Wikipedia article. Perhaps this isn't relevant to current breed societies but I thought it was interesting. 212.159.59.41 ( talk) — Preceding undated comment added 11:26, 23 January 2015 (UTC)
This edit is utterly unsourced and differs from the sourced information in the article - which traces the development of the color pattern and the breeding from the Nez Perce. DNA or whatever doesn't really have a bearing on when a breed develops - since strictly speaking most horses will trace to Central Asia (and further back from that ... from the Americas). We're talking about the actual development of the breed as distinct from other horses ... which is clearly traceable in the historical record to the Nez Perce tribe of what is now Idaho. Ealdgyth - Talk 18:43, 23 January 2015 (UTC)
I think perhaps you may be underestimating just how clever geneticist are becoming in tracing populations through known rates of mutation -- as was publicised widely with the recent with publication of of papers tracing the origins of aids ( Aids: Origin of pandemic 'was 1920s Kinshasa' How Technology Traced HIV to Its Very Beginnings) developments such as this are allowing scientists to trace movement in populations (in everything from viruses to humans) from wherever the initial mutation takes place. The Leopard complex article hardly scratches the surface on how powerful these tools are becoming. -- PBS ( talk) 00:26, 25 January 2015 (UTC)
Thank you for the light shed on that. ("Origins" original poster.) I did wonder about the idea what they had crossed the Bering Strait eastwards when the theory as I understand it is that the horse originated in the "american" land mass and migrated westward, dying out at their point of origin. BTW I did at a date my post - it would have been pointless not to as I referred to "yesterday" in it. Best wishes. 26 Jan 2015 212.159.59.41 ( talk)
Either someone did not actually see the BBC program or they are being less than reasonable in their representations. In the program much more than spotting was presented. Sparse tails, white sclera, mottled skin, conformity, gait peculiarities and hoof stripes were also noted. Much more than the offhand dismissal admits. Also the genetic comparison showed the relation of the Kyrgyz horses to Appaloosa in comparison to a selection of other horse breeds. While of course this was not an academic paper the mention of Central Asian heritage for many breeds as a dismissal does not really address what was presented. The Wiki article makes no mention of the program and that may be best until rigorous examination is available. However a note at the end of the program mentions an effort to start a Kyrgyz Appaloosa organization and that is noteworthy no matter how objectionable people may consider the speculation in the program to be. 184.45.74.170 ( talk) 02:34, 27 January 2015 (UTC)
In the face of the DNA evidence showing the proximity of these bloodlines to actual American purebred stock it is difficult to see how this breed's future is being placed above possible financial concerns for American breeders' short term profits. These Kyrgyz mares are currently being bred to pure bred Appaloosa studs in New Zealand. Let us hope that this will strengthen the health of the breed elsewhere ... if not in America. [1] MartinTheK ( talk) 23:17, 10 February 2015 (UTC)
Be advised that during my 69 years on this earth, I have never met an honest man who claimed he was abused when asked a simple question about his integrity. You claim to be an honest man who has been abused by my simple straightforward question. I take that for what it is. MartinTheK ( talk) 08:43, 11 February 2015 (UTC)
1) The BBC is entirely funded by the British government from TV set licenses. You could have known that (If you had actually watched the program at all--as I did.) because the BBC (including this program) never has commercials. Therefore, your claim that the BBC presented a poorly researched offhand story to drum up viewers is both insulting and plain nonsense.
2) Since you have never actually seen one of these Kyrgyz horses, your claim that they don't conform to the Appaloosa breed standard has no actual factual basis until you DO see one. If you dispute that, kindly tell me exactly what points to which they don't so conform.
3) Weaker DNA evidence than the scientist on the BBC showed, has sent men to death row. Kindly tell me, therefore what actual scientific facts refute 65 years of genetic and biochemical research. Dr. Cothran said that these horses' DNA is extremely close to your purebred American Appaloosa stock. Give me a fact to refute that other than your story that Dr. Cothran has been misquoted by unscrupulous BBC mountebanks. Here is the verbatim quote by Dr. Gus Cothran of Texas A&M University during the show, "So we took the Kyrgyz data and put it into the analysis of the geographic races of spotted horses and comparing them to North American spotted horses. What we got was this tree diagram where individuals are clustered based upon how exactly similar they are to each other. The closer similar they are. And we get a very distinct cluster right here in the middle only composed of the North American horses and the Kyrgyzstan horses. It clearly supports the Asian Ancestry. This more likely suggests that Asia is the more likely source for these horses." Now kindly tell me why this information should be suppressed by you. Tell me why these FACTS cannot be shown on this page so that normal adults may judge their veracity and meaning for their own selves.
4) This 69 year old lady New Zealand Appaloosa breeder rode horseback over a 13,779 foot pass to find these horses. I don't see how any real gentleman would make up some obviously preposterous story that the evidence in this documentary was dreamed up to find viewers for the BBC. Without concrete FACTS to refute her, it is just plain churlish to refuse her (and the readers') the right to have this story added to the Wikipedia Appaloosa page. MartinTheK ( talk) 08:43, 11 February 2015 (UTC)
As to your claim that true American Appaloosa breeding stock is plentiful with an adequate gene pool, this....
"During the Depression years, interest in the breed revived and the few surviving horses were used to create the foundation of the breed. The Appaloosa Horse club was created in 1938. Since then, the Appaloosa Horse has become the third largest breed registry in the world."
--Meet the Appaloosa,By Katherine Blocksdorf,Horses Expert
So now tell me how you went from a few surviving horses to the third largest breed registry without inbreeding. And then tell me why you are so adamantly opposed to adding genes from this newly found Krygyz stock instead of arabians and quarter horses. MartinTheK ( talk) 09:42, 11 February 2015 (UTC)
The question at hand is whether these are true facts that are pertinent to this Wikipedia page and thus deserve to be judged by the people who read it. This is, after all, a page in the Wikipedia and not your personal property. Is that not so? These facts are as follows:
1) Substantial numbers of horses which show many characteristics of purebred Appaloosas have been found in 2014 living in a remote mountain valley of Kyrgyzstan near the Chinese border. These horses exhibit spots, white sclerae, and striped hooves.
2) a DNA analysis conducted by Dr. Gus Cothran at Texas A & M University shows that these Kyrgyzstan horses closely match purebred American Appaloosas in their genetics.
3) As of 2015, controversy exists as to whether these horses should be considered true Appaloosas. A BBC documentary shows the 69-year-old female New Zealand Appaloosa breeder who rode horseback over a 13,777 foot mountain pass to find these horses. This documentary clearly shows these horses in their native milieu and discusses the DNA evidence.
Now Mr. Montanabw Sir, are those facts not true? Are they not germane? People come to this Wikipedia Appaloosa page to learn current and pertinent facts about Appaloosas. In that context neither your opinion nor mine count for a plug nickel.
Therefore I will now repeat my question . Exactly why are you continuing to refuse the addition of these facts to this Wikipedia page? If you wish, I don't see why an additional section cannot be added entitled "Kyrgyzstan horse controversy" containing this information. Can you?
Because if we can't resolve this question here, that is the issue I am going to ask the next level to resolve. I will not ask them to decide about LP genes or whether the BBC has made up some fairy story about the Appaloosa or whether the moon is made of green cheese. I will ask them whether you are in your legitimate rights to deny the inclusion of this information to the Wikipedia readers. Am I speaking clearly enough, Mister? MartinTheK ( talk) 19:41, 11 February 2015 (UTC)
As we are apparently at an impasse over this question, I will set aside tomorrow to ask for third party resolution. As to your theory of your "right" to suppress these facts, I don't give two cents for your words after that ignorant, preposterous, country bumpkin lie of yours about the BBC broadcasting lies in their story so they can drum up viewers like Fox news does. MartinTheK ( talk) 20:31, 11 February 2015 (UTC)
I watched that show ( Secret Horse: The quest for the true Appaloosa) and the end credits clearly stated "Copyright BBC MMXV". You would have seen that too if you had actually seen it - as opposed to talking through your hat. The lies of you "honest men" are lame, preposterous, and tedious in the extreme.
In addition to Ealdgyth's excellent examples above, let me explain further:
Hope this helps. Montanabw (talk) 04:24, 12 February 2015 (UTC)
Aren't Appaloosa's smarter than the average horse? Can this be added? — Rlevse • Talk • 02:54, 28 January 2010 (UTC)
I actually got around to taking a few photos this afternoon. They're not the greatest (it's getting cold, they're getting their winter coats), but I got a few decent ones. I would like to replace the image of the sclera and the image of the mottling with one image showing both. Here's one of the ones that I got:
, but if there's something wrong with that one or you guys have a better one I'm all ears. The article gets a little crowded with images in the middle - we're not supposed to have text sandwiched between images - and combining two into one might help. Dana boomer ( talk) 19:27, 12 November 2010 (UTC)
Question: How good/bad is allbreed for a source at FA? Pedigree of Red Eagle: http://www.allbreedpedigree.com/red+eagle4 (How the heck that horse is a more-than half-Arab, he sure is plain...they sure put real butts on 'em back in those days, though! (grin)) be nice to throw it in. Montanabw (talk) 04:14, 14 November 2010 (UTC)
I like most of the images we have, but I know we are reviewing them too. If needed, Flickr now has a pretty good collection (275) of images tagged by uploaders as CC-commerical, etc. I'm not that good at understanding how the copyright stuff works, so I didn't upload anything to Commons until or unless we think we can use one -- but some of these, or at least other images of the same horse -- ARE already in commons ( http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:Appaloosa ) . But FYI if you think some will pass muster if we have headaches with what's in there, we have more to draw from than in the past. Montanabw (talk) 20:24, 7 December 2010 (UTC)
A couple of them stood out for me.
FYI, the user on Flickr "Just Chaos" has TONS of horse images (like 2000!), but with a slightly weird dual licensing tag -- Ealdgyth or Dana, can you guys determine if this is an OK one? It's a gold mine for WPEQ if OK!
Ok, this is really bad. The claim of paleolitic spotted horses is countered in the source with this: However, current studies indicate that rather than representing actual horses the cave artists used the spots to represent dreams or visions. This is contrary to what this article claimed before I removed it. -- Kim van der Linde at venus 21:31, 10 December 2010 (UTC)
OK, campers, taking a stab at Kim's idea to do a chart of the coat patterns. If it works we might want to add this to the article in place of the text that's there, but it's open to discussion (Does FA review get crabby at charts the way they do galleries?) I'm a noob at charts, I cribbed this from another article with no clue how the markup works, so help definitely needed: Montanabw (talk) 08:27, 11 December 2010 (UTC)
The coat color of an Appaloosa is a combination of a base color with a overlaid spotting pattern. The base colors recognized by the Appaloosa Horse Club include bay, black, chestnut, palomino, buckskin, cremello or perlino, roan, gray, dun and grulla. Appaloosa markings have several pattern variations. [1] It is this unique group of spotting patterns, collectively called the "leopard complex," [2] that most people associate with the Appaloosa horse. [1] Spots overlay darker skin, and often are surrounded by a "halo," where the skin next to the spot is also dark but the overlying hair coat is white. [3] Spots are not to be confused with dapples, a circular shade variation within a single coat color, most often seen on gray horses. citation needed
It is not always easy to predict a grown Appaloosa's color at birth. Foals in general tend to be born with coats that darken when they shed their baby hair. [4] Further, Appaloosa foals do not always show classic leopard complex characteristics at birth. [2] Patterns sometimes change over the course of the horse's life. Some horses are born with a pattern that does not change, particularly blanket and leopard horses. Others, particularly the varnish roan and snowflake patterns, will be born showing very little color pattern, but develop more color as they get older. [3]
In addition, the ApHC recognizes the concept of a "Solid" horse which has a base color, "but no contrasting color in the form of an Appaloosa coat pattern." Solid horses can be registered if they have mottled skin and one other leopard complex characteristic. [1]
Base color are overlain by various spotting patterns, which are variable and often do not fit neatly into a specific category. [1] These patterns are described as follows:
Pattern | Description | Image [5] |
Blanket or snowcap |
A solid white area normally over, but not limited to, the hip area with a contrasting base color. [1] [6] |
![]() |
Spots | general term that refers to a horse which has white or dark spots over all or a portion of its body. [1] |
![]() |
Blanket with spots | a white blanket which has dark spots within the white. The spots are usually the same color as the horse's base color. [1] |
![]() |
Leopard | Considered an extension of a blanket to cover the whole body. A white horse with dark spots that flow out over the entire body. [6] |
|
Few Spot Leopard | A mostly white horse with a bit of color remaining around the flank, neck and head. [6] |
![]() |
Snowflake | A horse with white spots, flecks, on a dark body. Typically the white spots increase in number and size as the horse ages. [6] |
![]() |
Appaloosa Roan, Varnish roan or Marble |
A distinct version of the leopard complex. Intermixed dark and light hairs with lighter colored area on the forehead, jowls and frontal bones of the face, over the back, loin and hips. Darker areas may appear along the edges of the frontal bones of the face as well and also on the legs, stifle, above the eye, point of the hip and behind the elbow. The dark points over bony areas are called "varnish marks" and distinguish this pattern from a traditional roan. [1] [6] |
![]() |
Mottled | A fewspot leopard that is completely white with only mottled skin showing. [6] |
![]() |
Roan Blanket or Frost |
Horses with roaning over the croup and hips. The blanket normally occurs over, but is not limited to, the hip area. [1] [6] |
![]() |
Roan Blanket With Spots | refers to a horse with a roan blanket which has white and/or dark spots within the roan area. [1] |
![]() |
Best actual roan blanket is this horse, but fuzzy, low quality image. Thoughts?
Oh and, hurrah! Sponenberg at 153-156 has PHOTOS! We can't use his, obviously, but we CAN now cite examples without my OR (and we may need to tweak mine some... help??) Montanabw (talk) 08:32, 13 December 2010 (UTC)
The images are okay except for File:AppaloosaMrGloJangles.jpg (right). Located at http://www.flickr.com/photos/silvermoonapps/371842872/, the caption states "Mr Glo Jangles, Charlie and Gi Gi's sire!" This photograph is also available at Munson Elite Stables, who have a larger version of http://www.flickr.com/photos/silvermoonapps/371842873/.
The Stables are run by Jerry and Kelly Munson. [1] bankerssilvermoon is definitely not Kelly, nor is Jerry her husband. [2] Her signature is definitely not Munson either. [3]
Unlike the rest of bankerssilvermoon's uploads, the photographs of Mr Glo Jangles do not have the camera model data and are much smaller in size (those with the camera model data are 2 or more times larger). The caption (that the horse is the sire to the horses owned by bankerssilvermoon), the size, and the missing data lend support to my belief that Mr Glo Jangles' photographs are not copyrighted to bankerssilvermoon. I believe the photographs are a set of publicity (or advertising) pictures of the stallion in question. It appears that Mr Glo Jangles is reared and maintained by Patti Bertram [4] of Patti's Show Horses. [5] Jappalang ( talk) 02:52, 17 December 2010 (UTC)
OK, now I'm throwing things. I was double-checking some of the old sources now that Kim found that the Appaloosa Museum updated their site from where it was in 2007 or whenever it was last checked (which was a good thing), and discovered our ref "Identity" has also changed, ApHC seems to have dumped "leopard" "varnish roan" and such terms in favor of less colorful but more descriptive terms. So I tweaked the list accordingly. The blockquote section is verbatim, so to avoid copyvio, not sure if I need to add more disclaimers explaining that I used ApHC's exact wording for a reason. I also went through the entire 2010 rule book with various word searches and the rulebook doesn't mention any of the patterns, anywhere. The web side says, tantalizingly, that the "registration department" might use different terms. But a search of the web site came up with nothing. The old terms are still in widespread use, though, so I think they need to stay if we can source them. This does, of course, completely screw up the chart above that I just spend two hours on... Did I say PHOOEY!!!! (I'm actually saying other words out loud, but can't say those here! LOL!) I'm going to look at some Google books, but I'm home on the dialup, which hates Google books, and I'm going to have to have a real life tomorrow, so might not be online for a bit once I'm done tonight. I'm off to see if I can get past the tantalizing examples here and find actual content. Montanabw (talk) 06:36, 11 December 2010 (UTC) Follow up:OK, done. Fixed. Sourced. Everyone else can now tweak away. I am just tweaking =:-O Thank god I only needed five pages out of Sponenberg and it all loaded on Google books. Now I'm going to bed! Montanabw (talk) 08:12, 11 December 2010 (UTC)
Lp is not an allele. It is a gene in the context of classical genetics. The gene in molecular genetics is TRPM1. Maybe someone can fix it. -- Kim van der Linde at venus 14:53, 13 December 2010 (UTC)
--It's a direct quotation from ref name="2007 ApHC"/ which is cited at the end of that very sentence. Do we need it in there twice in the same sentence? --MTBW
--Because other horses have white stripes on their hooves if they have white feet with ermine spots, Appy feet are distinct from that... I think that's how the source worded it, I'll tweak a little. --MTBW
-- I explained it, hopefully better, still within what the "Identify" source says --MTBW
--Dumbed the color stuff down, the registration stuff is explained later in the article, I put "regular" in quotes to identify it as a term of art. --MTBW
--Yes we did, first sentence, but I'll put the word "core" up there too. Montanabw (talk) 04:37, 27 March 2011 (UTC)
--OK--MTBW
--Wording suggestion exceeds the source. Rule 205, quote: " No horse shall be registered with the ApHC that has draft, pony, Pinto, or Paint breeding." ApHC would say that spotted draft horses and spotted ponies have leopard complex genetics, but they are NOT Appaloosas (even if someone can find a pony or a Percheron in old pedigree records)
--Bennett's book was based quite a bit on her independent research, I think, and it would have been history of the west coast, not the east. Basically, the deal is that they were dumped on the west coast (how the hell they got them that far alive, I don't know) not the east coast. Hence, how they wound up as Indian ponies. I'll see what else I can dig up, why is it that after leaving Bennett out for months, I finally put it away only to need to drag it out again almost immediately? ARRGH!--MTBW ---Follow up Google books has parts of Conquerors online here by the way, what's the proper way to add a Google Books link to the citation here? Maybe we should. Her info on this topic is page 391, definitely she says they were shipped "Mexico, California and Oregon." She doesn't footnote, there is a bibliography in the book, though. --MTBW
Yes it was, first in the lede and then in "History" -- "Revitalization." However, if you missed that, others will too, so I'll just say it again. --MTBW
Checklinks report - have some dead links. Ealdgyth - Talk 21:59, 26 March 2011 (UTC)
Follow up' Took a whack at the war section and chopped a bit. Hope that helped. What is left seems relevant -- the journey and its raw distance makes the detail significant...the Appy people actually used have a ride that retraced parts of this route each year, I think. The route is a Big Deal. If you think other stuff is irrelevant, let me know and I'll either chop some more or give you my always-reticent opinion why it needs to stay! ;-) Montanabw (talk) 21:55, 8 April 2011 (UTC)
I don't know how to fix those. Do they actually matter? I don't see any OCLC numbers in the refs, just ISBN (?) If you know what has to be done, you can do it, or tell me what needs to be dug up and I can try to fix. For Sponenberg, I used this, which has no OCLC listed and I just checked the ISBN, it's correct. I don't have Stanger, though looks like there is a copy here in town if you need me to look at something in it??? Montanabw (talk) 21:34, 8 April 2011 (UTC)
And:
Only one Sponenberg here, but I suppose others could be added, so clarified it was the 2003 book we have listed in the refs. I'm not sure the best way to source that, I said "based on" because basically the images in Sponenberg are all copyrighted where he says, for example, "this is an example of the snowflake pattern," so we have been trying to find ones in wiki that resemble those in Sponenberg's photos. If it should just be a ref that sayd "Sponenberg 2003, pp 153-156" with no other verbiage, feel free to just fix that however it needs to be fixed. Or tell me what to do. This isn't my strong suit. Montanabw (talk) 21:34, 8 April 2011 (UTC)
I was invited a few days ago to comment on this article. I'm not sure how welcome my comments are likely to be at the moment, nor indeed how welcome they have been in the past. But there's one rather obvious thing here that you might like to look at: the sclera cannot be "around" the eye, since the sclera is a part of the eye.
If you would like me to read the article carefully for other possible errors, I'd be happy to do so.
Justlettersandnumbers (
talk)
22:32, 8 April 2011 (UTC)
So, I've read this article a couple of times. IMO the sclera thing needs fixing in all of the 3 or 4 places it comes up. Questions: is the sclera always white in this breed? is the iris smaller than usual, or the eye-surround larger? or in other words, why does the sclera show?
Some other random criticisms, intended only to be constructive/helpful:
This is fairly comical reading, but detailed and presumably fairly reliable. The three Appaloosa stallions imported by Freddie Nielsen are near the end.
This is someone who is marketing Knabstrupper x Appaloosa or other crosses as Knabstruppers; the history is mostly copied from the Danish site, Nielsen and his 3 stallions are there. Did anyone read
this to check there's no useful extra info in it?
Justlettersandnumbers (
talk)
11:46, 22 April 2011 (UTC)
(After edit conflict) That IS some interesting material. As you can see, I asked Ealdgyth to see if that Danish site will pass WP:RS. The bit in Lynghaug is rather interesting, and it does back the spotted horses from Europe material we have from Bennett. But much of it may be more suited to the Tiger horse article -- given Ealdgyth's comments and also that "Tiger Horse" association is kind of over-romanticized to the point of (IMHO) goofiness, I think I'd like to see the actual underlying source material to use here -- Lynghaug seems to be as more-or-less reliable as any of the other breed encyclopedias, but looks like some material comes directly from the Tiger horse association without critical analysis -- what I caught was that it has some aspects of the Nez Perce War history wrong, and the use of "Ni Mii Pu" for the Nez Perce is rather "precious" -- sort of like a German calling himself a "Deutschlander" when speaking English -- the people call themselves "Nez Perce" in everyday conversation and use Nimiipuu more for internal tribal use --it's a long story and you kind of have to live out here to get it, but Indian people generally tend to have a bit of irritation (amount varies) with academics who treat them like anthropological studies and overdo the political correctness beyond what they themselves ask; it can be viewed as condescending. Some use the term "culture vulture" to describe people prone to such things. Or, as one Native American Studies prof I know explained it, "We're OK if you call us 'Indians,' we're just glad Columbus wasn't trying to find Turkey!" :-D Montanabw (talk) 19:25, 22 April 2011 (UTC)
--Yes. The Nez Perce nation, at the moment, does not use the accented form: http://www.nezperce.org/ Also, we say it "Nez Purse", not "Nez Per-say", hence, as the French pronunciation appears to have vanished from contemporary use, so, apparently, did the accent. Montanabw (talk) 17:12, 18 April 2011 (UTC)
--Will look at that. --MTBW Fix? Lp comes independent of the Appaloosa breed, there clearly are other breeds with that color that stayed behind in Europe, even after they became unfashionable! Source cited uses "Knabstrupper" and makes references to a bunch of other quasi-historical stuff that is dicey and we have better sources. They also do mention the Norkier (Pinzgauer), I tweaked the section, and moved the European breeds up to the history section where it's more relevant. See what all of you think
--It's not in that tribal article much, and undoubtably the people working on that article would complain that their horse breeding was undue weight if I moved it there, sigh... but to the point, the breed is intertwined thoroughly with the tribal history, particularly of the 1870s, and the big deal was that a 1200 mile flight was possible because these horses are tough as nails. (There is also a joke out here that the Nez Perce were such good fighters because after traveling all that way on Appies, they were so seriously pissed at the horses that they were more than ready to fight with something less challenging, like the US Army!) --MTBW
--Will check. --MTBW Follow up: Found a review of the Haines book, which appears to have been the source. While Haines' research on the Nez Perce appears to be excellent for its time (1960s), he was criticized even then for his weaknesses in palentology: "To include the spotted horses from Peche-Merle, which were not Equus caballus but an extinct Pleistocene variety, is disturbing without an explanation of their relationship to modern spotted horses." Jay D. Frierman, Pacific Historical Review, Vol. 32, No. 4 (Nov., 1963), p. 421 Ealdgyth, do you have Haines? If not, I may need to trot over to the MHS and see if they have a copy; this may also have been Bennett's source for the Europe-to-West-Coast theory. Montanabw (talk) 20:47, 22 April 2011 (UTC)
Hope some of this is helpful,
Justlettersandnumbers (
talk)
12:32, 16 April 2011 (UTC)
Just the ISBN issues and the gaited horses site to fix... Ealdgyth - Talk 00:33, 16 April 2011 (UTC)
Note: Possible backup sources if needed (not great, but independent of the horse crowd), [7] (they cite Ga Wa Ni Pony Boy, :-P but still...) Montanabw (talk) 18:47, 26 April 2011 (UTC) Backup source on the color rule controversy: [8] Montanabw (talk) 17:47, 27 April 2011 (UTC)
Starting a new header because the discussion has moved away from the sclera into other things. Just spend some time in JSTOR and some scientific databases and can't find anything on any studies of gaitedness in spotted horses that supports the Tiger Horse registry claims. Found a couple reviews of the Haines book, one with some useful info that I may re-add to the article. If no one objects, I don't think we want to venture into the rabbit hole that Tiger horse piece opens up of verifying Indian legends and wild west myth, it could be a long slog. I would like to see if we can properly verify that a few Appies have been sent back to Europe to revitalize the Knabstrup(per), though. Anyone able to help?? Montanabw (talk) 20:40, 22 April 2011 (UTC) Follow up(Edit conflict) JLAN and E, I'll add a wee bit on the Knabs, we already do have a link, somewhat obscure, to the Tiger Horse down in the "Uses" section where we discuss the various crossbreds. Montanabw (talk) 20:52, 22 April 2011 (UTC)
I guess this fits under 'historical stuff' - there seems to be an inconsistency. In the third paragraph under "Breed Characteristics", it states: "The old-type Appaloosa was later modified by the addition of draft horse blood after the 1877 defeat of the Nez Perce, when U.S. Government policy forced the Indians to become farmers and provided them with draft horse mares to breed to existing stallions." However, in the first paragraph under "Aftermath of the Nez Perce War", it states the Nez Perce : "... were required by the Army to breed what mares they still had to draft horse stallions in an attempt to create farm horses." So did the Army/Government provide them with draft stallions or draft mares? I don't want to edit it because I don't know which one is correct. Ruralgal ( talk) 02:19, 23 April 2012 (UTC)
If anyone wants to expand the Uses section to add a bit on international use, this may help: http://www.aphcuk.org/web/aphcuk/ulinks.cfm?c=59 However, I am fried, and RL is going to be getting nuts on me starting next week and going into late May, so while I will take the time needed to help shepherd through FA if we take it up, I am too fried to create or add much new material, wordsmithing is all you can hope for... Montanabw (talk) 21:28, 22 April 2011 (UTC)
It's not the international use that seems to be missing IMO, it's the international POV. The horse is registered in a number of ways in a number of countries, Germany, Australia, Italy and Britain among them, I think. It is a world horse. However laughable the idea of a British Appaloosa (pure farce IMO), it is, like the Tiger Horse, an alternative take on what an Appaloosa should or could be, and perhaps deserves a passing mention. Otherwise this will just be another of those articles that takes the dominant breed registry as gospel without considering minority views. If the ISBNs still need work I can do that, assuming it's just a matter of matching the ISBNs to the editions cited;
this catalogue and
this one make that a very easy task, but you'd need to tell me which ones seem to be wrong. The sclera thing still needs fixing; the sclera can't be round the eye because the sclera is a part of the eye. IMO it is TMI on the picture caption anyway.
Justlettersandnumbers (
talk)
10:05, 27 April 2011 (UTC)
Well, we agree on one thing at least, the FAO's numbers; a whole bowl of salt, not just a grain, if you ask me. Seems they count as Laurens Van Der Post says baboons do, "One, two, a HELL of a lot!". For the rest, you have expressed exactly my concern, just rather better than I was able to. For as long as this article remains about "a specific subset of spotted horses" registered under the name "Appaloosa" by one breed registry, it will continue to fail to be encyclopaedic, continue to fail to represent minority views and continue to fail to be neutral. Where in wikipedia, under what title, should the article for those Dutch Appaloosa horses be created if they are to be excluded from the Appaloosa article because they don't meet somebody else's definition of what an Appaloosa ought to be? If the Dutch society is not affiliated to the ApHC, all the more reason to make sure it is included IMO. As far as I am aware (and as you know, that is not very far), the ApHC does not own the name "Appaloosa"; if it does, no doubt it will soon establish that ownership in the courts. Once it has done so, it would be reasonable to limit the scope of this article to horses registered with that one association under that name. But until then, it is not. The aim here is not to represent things as they ought to be, or as one particular association says they ought to be, but as they are, would you not agree?
Justlettersandnumbers (
talk)
18:29, 30 April 2011 (UTC)
I fiddled with the cosmetic layout of the coat colour chart, as the left-hand column looked a bit cramped. Montana rightly comments that the first two rows of the chart now look rather empty. That is because the Spots picture is very tall. That could easily be fixed by moving Leopard and Fewspot leopard to the top of the chart, if no-one has any objection? But that is just cosmetics. What's bothering me more at the moment is that the more I look at the Spots picture the more I see a Blanket with spots horse. As everyone knows, I know a good deal less than nothing about these horses; but to the uneducated eye, it's just a better Blanket-with-spots pic than the other one.
Justlettersandnumbers (
talk)
10:03, 30 April 2011 (UTC)
The gene is called LP throughout the article. That seems to be widely used, but is at variance with what is written at
Leopard complex#The Lp gene. Any particular reason?
Justlettersandnumbers (
talk)
10:54, 30 April 2011 (UTC)
Wrong. It is at least five closely similar breeds, at least three of them in North America alone. If this article is to be about "the Appaloosa horse as defined by the ApHC alone" then you had better move it to a name that reflects that narrow-minded and blinkered view. Maybe someone else will write an article about the Appaloosa as a world horse.
Justlettersandnumbers (
talk)
15:15, 2 May 2011 (UTC)
A couple of quick replies:
Re remarks by Ealdgyth above:
Re remarks by Pesky above: you may be right that I am wrong on this, I've been wrong on several things recently, including believing that contributing to this project was going to be a pleasant experience marked by stimulating intellectual dialogue, exchange of views and collaboration with like-minded editors etc. etc., you get the picture. I'm afraid you lost me a bit with yer Cleveland Bay, I wasn't aware that there were multiple registers for that breed. Anyway, convincing me I'm wrong here is quite straightforward: it just involves showing beyond reasonable doubt that the AApA, the APHCC, the FAHR, the British Appaloosa Society and that Dutch one either don't exist or, if they do, that they don't register enough horses to be considered in any way significant. That shouldn't be too hard for a couple of them, but I fear it may be quite tough to make the Canadian one go away.
Justlettersandnumbers (
talk)
00:15, 7 May 2011 (UTC)
We should probably put in something about the international registration options, including a mention that some registries are not affiliated with the ApHC. Ealdgyth - Talk 13:40, 6 May 2011 (UTC)
(undent) Proposed text and references:
There are other "Appaloosa" registries not affiliated with the ApHC for horses with leopard complex genetics. These registries tend to have different foundation breeding and histories than the North American Appaloosa. [7] [8] However, the ApHC is by far the largest Appaloosa horse registry as the third-largest light horse breed registry in the world, [9] and it hosts one of the world's largest breed shows. [10]
APstudies
was invoked but never defined (see the
help page).Sponenberg90
was invoked but never defined (see the
help page).Thoughts/comments? Feel free to tweak/rewrite, Dana boomer ( talk) 14:11, 11 May 2011 (UTC)
The sourcing for Stanger's 50 years of Appaloosa history on the article doesn't correspond with this, which comes up in WorldCat for the ISBN: http://www.worldcat.org/search?qt=wikipedia&q=isbn%3A0966116046 Can/should someone fix? Montanabw (talk) 20:04, 12 May 2011 (UTC)
Follow up: MHS Says "Publisher's Press" same as WorldCat, may want to tweak that (if we have to go to the hard copy, this is where I'll find it..) And still the question mark,. Edith Stanger appears to have her own web site, which is out of Idaho Falls, but I suppose its OR for us to synthesize. Montanabw (talk) 21:02, 12 May 2011 (UTC)
Beautiful, great horses. PumpkinSky talk 23:57, 10 July 2011 (UTC)
what age do the spots appear on foals? or are they born with them?? Just had a foal and is black all over! will she get her spots?? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 94.11.106.140 ( talk) 16:06, 13 July 2012 (UTC)
Would it be worthwhile to add a section on famous owners of appaloosas, or appaloosas in popular culture? Paul McCartney and his former wife Linda Eastman had several of these. I saw them on his farm in Kent, England, and he mentioned them in the news at the time of Linda's death. There is a reference here but no doubt a better source can be found for the same thing. -- Storye book ( talk) 13:09, 5 October 2012 (UTC)
The article states in part: "... the Nez Perce people of what today is the United States Pacific Northwest developed the original American breed." This page and several other pages related to the Nez Perce tribe (e.g., pages about towns within the present reservation) suggest that the Appaloosas were deliberately bred by the Nez Perce to produce the resulting breed. I was raised on the reservation and the consensus position of all tribal members I asked about this issue were adequately summed up by my high school football coach: "We pretty much left that up to the horses." Moreover, the nature of Nez Perce tribal life tends to confirm that. The Nez Perce at the relevant times were nomadic bands with only small levels of interaction. This fact is incompatible with the notion that they had a deliberate tribal horse breeding program. So unless an authoritative source can be found that says otherwise, language suggesting that the Nez Perce had a breeding program needs to be removed. The Appaloosa evolved; it was not bred. Marbux ( talk) 14:02, 26 December 2012 (UTC)
Interesting report on UK TV last night about a New Zealand breeder who trekked into Kyrgyzstan looking for spotted horses after seeing one on TV. The genetics of these horses appear to be the same as known Appaloosa genetics, and the meet the "Appaloosa visual tests" explained in the Wikipedia article. Perhaps this isn't relevant to current breed societies but I thought it was interesting. 212.159.59.41 ( talk) — Preceding undated comment added 11:26, 23 January 2015 (UTC)
This edit is utterly unsourced and differs from the sourced information in the article - which traces the development of the color pattern and the breeding from the Nez Perce. DNA or whatever doesn't really have a bearing on when a breed develops - since strictly speaking most horses will trace to Central Asia (and further back from that ... from the Americas). We're talking about the actual development of the breed as distinct from other horses ... which is clearly traceable in the historical record to the Nez Perce tribe of what is now Idaho. Ealdgyth - Talk 18:43, 23 January 2015 (UTC)
I think perhaps you may be underestimating just how clever geneticist are becoming in tracing populations through known rates of mutation -- as was publicised widely with the recent with publication of of papers tracing the origins of aids ( Aids: Origin of pandemic 'was 1920s Kinshasa' How Technology Traced HIV to Its Very Beginnings) developments such as this are allowing scientists to trace movement in populations (in everything from viruses to humans) from wherever the initial mutation takes place. The Leopard complex article hardly scratches the surface on how powerful these tools are becoming. -- PBS ( talk) 00:26, 25 January 2015 (UTC)
Thank you for the light shed on that. ("Origins" original poster.) I did wonder about the idea what they had crossed the Bering Strait eastwards when the theory as I understand it is that the horse originated in the "american" land mass and migrated westward, dying out at their point of origin. BTW I did at a date my post - it would have been pointless not to as I referred to "yesterday" in it. Best wishes. 26 Jan 2015 212.159.59.41 ( talk)
Either someone did not actually see the BBC program or they are being less than reasonable in their representations. In the program much more than spotting was presented. Sparse tails, white sclera, mottled skin, conformity, gait peculiarities and hoof stripes were also noted. Much more than the offhand dismissal admits. Also the genetic comparison showed the relation of the Kyrgyz horses to Appaloosa in comparison to a selection of other horse breeds. While of course this was not an academic paper the mention of Central Asian heritage for many breeds as a dismissal does not really address what was presented. The Wiki article makes no mention of the program and that may be best until rigorous examination is available. However a note at the end of the program mentions an effort to start a Kyrgyz Appaloosa organization and that is noteworthy no matter how objectionable people may consider the speculation in the program to be. 184.45.74.170 ( talk) 02:34, 27 January 2015 (UTC)
In the face of the DNA evidence showing the proximity of these bloodlines to actual American purebred stock it is difficult to see how this breed's future is being placed above possible financial concerns for American breeders' short term profits. These Kyrgyz mares are currently being bred to pure bred Appaloosa studs in New Zealand. Let us hope that this will strengthen the health of the breed elsewhere ... if not in America. [1] MartinTheK ( talk) 23:17, 10 February 2015 (UTC)
Be advised that during my 69 years on this earth, I have never met an honest man who claimed he was abused when asked a simple question about his integrity. You claim to be an honest man who has been abused by my simple straightforward question. I take that for what it is. MartinTheK ( talk) 08:43, 11 February 2015 (UTC)
1) The BBC is entirely funded by the British government from TV set licenses. You could have known that (If you had actually watched the program at all--as I did.) because the BBC (including this program) never has commercials. Therefore, your claim that the BBC presented a poorly researched offhand story to drum up viewers is both insulting and plain nonsense.
2) Since you have never actually seen one of these Kyrgyz horses, your claim that they don't conform to the Appaloosa breed standard has no actual factual basis until you DO see one. If you dispute that, kindly tell me exactly what points to which they don't so conform.
3) Weaker DNA evidence than the scientist on the BBC showed, has sent men to death row. Kindly tell me, therefore what actual scientific facts refute 65 years of genetic and biochemical research. Dr. Cothran said that these horses' DNA is extremely close to your purebred American Appaloosa stock. Give me a fact to refute that other than your story that Dr. Cothran has been misquoted by unscrupulous BBC mountebanks. Here is the verbatim quote by Dr. Gus Cothran of Texas A&M University during the show, "So we took the Kyrgyz data and put it into the analysis of the geographic races of spotted horses and comparing them to North American spotted horses. What we got was this tree diagram where individuals are clustered based upon how exactly similar they are to each other. The closer similar they are. And we get a very distinct cluster right here in the middle only composed of the North American horses and the Kyrgyzstan horses. It clearly supports the Asian Ancestry. This more likely suggests that Asia is the more likely source for these horses." Now kindly tell me why this information should be suppressed by you. Tell me why these FACTS cannot be shown on this page so that normal adults may judge their veracity and meaning for their own selves.
4) This 69 year old lady New Zealand Appaloosa breeder rode horseback over a 13,779 foot pass to find these horses. I don't see how any real gentleman would make up some obviously preposterous story that the evidence in this documentary was dreamed up to find viewers for the BBC. Without concrete FACTS to refute her, it is just plain churlish to refuse her (and the readers') the right to have this story added to the Wikipedia Appaloosa page. MartinTheK ( talk) 08:43, 11 February 2015 (UTC)
As to your claim that true American Appaloosa breeding stock is plentiful with an adequate gene pool, this....
"During the Depression years, interest in the breed revived and the few surviving horses were used to create the foundation of the breed. The Appaloosa Horse club was created in 1938. Since then, the Appaloosa Horse has become the third largest breed registry in the world."
--Meet the Appaloosa,By Katherine Blocksdorf,Horses Expert
So now tell me how you went from a few surviving horses to the third largest breed registry without inbreeding. And then tell me why you are so adamantly opposed to adding genes from this newly found Krygyz stock instead of arabians and quarter horses. MartinTheK ( talk) 09:42, 11 February 2015 (UTC)
The question at hand is whether these are true facts that are pertinent to this Wikipedia page and thus deserve to be judged by the people who read it. This is, after all, a page in the Wikipedia and not your personal property. Is that not so? These facts are as follows:
1) Substantial numbers of horses which show many characteristics of purebred Appaloosas have been found in 2014 living in a remote mountain valley of Kyrgyzstan near the Chinese border. These horses exhibit spots, white sclerae, and striped hooves.
2) a DNA analysis conducted by Dr. Gus Cothran at Texas A & M University shows that these Kyrgyzstan horses closely match purebred American Appaloosas in their genetics.
3) As of 2015, controversy exists as to whether these horses should be considered true Appaloosas. A BBC documentary shows the 69-year-old female New Zealand Appaloosa breeder who rode horseback over a 13,777 foot mountain pass to find these horses. This documentary clearly shows these horses in their native milieu and discusses the DNA evidence.
Now Mr. Montanabw Sir, are those facts not true? Are they not germane? People come to this Wikipedia Appaloosa page to learn current and pertinent facts about Appaloosas. In that context neither your opinion nor mine count for a plug nickel.
Therefore I will now repeat my question . Exactly why are you continuing to refuse the addition of these facts to this Wikipedia page? If you wish, I don't see why an additional section cannot be added entitled "Kyrgyzstan horse controversy" containing this information. Can you?
Because if we can't resolve this question here, that is the issue I am going to ask the next level to resolve. I will not ask them to decide about LP genes or whether the BBC has made up some fairy story about the Appaloosa or whether the moon is made of green cheese. I will ask them whether you are in your legitimate rights to deny the inclusion of this information to the Wikipedia readers. Am I speaking clearly enough, Mister? MartinTheK ( talk) 19:41, 11 February 2015 (UTC)
As we are apparently at an impasse over this question, I will set aside tomorrow to ask for third party resolution. As to your theory of your "right" to suppress these facts, I don't give two cents for your words after that ignorant, preposterous, country bumpkin lie of yours about the BBC broadcasting lies in their story so they can drum up viewers like Fox news does. MartinTheK ( talk) 20:31, 11 February 2015 (UTC)
I watched that show ( Secret Horse: The quest for the true Appaloosa) and the end credits clearly stated "Copyright BBC MMXV". You would have seen that too if you had actually seen it - as opposed to talking through your hat. The lies of you "honest men" are lame, preposterous, and tedious in the extreme.
In addition to Ealdgyth's excellent examples above, let me explain further:
Hope this helps. Montanabw (talk) 04:24, 12 February 2015 (UTC)