This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Backyard breeder redirect. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
This redirect does not require a rating on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
"Backyard Breeder" is simply a pejorative term. Unless someone can find a rational way to merge it into the controversy over breeding, it shouldn't be an article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wolf4NK ( talk • contribs) 09:47, 29 December 2013 (UTC)
I agree that this is a bad article. The only use I could find on the web was animal rescue groups, animal welfare groups, and "reputable" commerical breeders using basically as a synonym for puppy mills, or the equivalent with other animals. In particular, many of these groups are -not- referring to amateurs, but to small scale commercial operations with questionable practices. The one citation in the intro is just an article about puppy mills. The section of the article with a list of Undesirable Characteristics has one citation which contains none of the items on the list, just a two line definition in a glossary. I concur that the term should maybe be described in Puppy Mill if anywhere, and that this article should be deleted. Krb19 ( talk) 13:51, 3 January 2021 (UTC)
I also agree. The term is Ill-defined and the article contents could be merged with another article dealing with similar subject matter. Adondai ( talk) 01:47, 5 January 2021 (UTC)
This article is rather POV against "home-breeders". It sounds to me rather like professional breeders propaganda. Regards Loudenvier 16:27, 15 January 2007 (UTC)
I do NOT support merging this with Selective Breeding. The current article concentrates on the breeding issues with 'Backyard' operations but this is far from being the sole issue with regard to this type of breeder. Those other issues would be inappropriate for the Selective Breeding article. The SB article, IMHO, also already concentrates excessively on pet breeding concerns, merging this entry would unbalance it even more.
This article needs a rewrite, not deletion or merger. Any rewrite will run the risk of appearing NPOV as this is largely used as a pejorative term by and within the animal welfare community, so a lot of word like 'alleged', 'in the view of' etc. will be needed. Finding a 'neutral' definition will, I think, be almost impossible - this is NOT a neutral term , or at least it isn't often used as one. It can, however, be reported in a NPOV manner.-- BoatThing 11:27, 12 March 2007 (UTC)
I still see the problems reported earlier: this is essentially an attack upon the process. The article should be written with sources from all perspectives, avoiding propaganda.In looking for sources, remember that anecdotes are not encyclopedic content. DGG ( talk ) 16:20, 7 January 2014 (UTC)
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Backyard breeder redirect. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
This redirect does not require a rating on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
"Backyard Breeder" is simply a pejorative term. Unless someone can find a rational way to merge it into the controversy over breeding, it shouldn't be an article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wolf4NK ( talk • contribs) 09:47, 29 December 2013 (UTC)
I agree that this is a bad article. The only use I could find on the web was animal rescue groups, animal welfare groups, and "reputable" commerical breeders using basically as a synonym for puppy mills, or the equivalent with other animals. In particular, many of these groups are -not- referring to amateurs, but to small scale commercial operations with questionable practices. The one citation in the intro is just an article about puppy mills. The section of the article with a list of Undesirable Characteristics has one citation which contains none of the items on the list, just a two line definition in a glossary. I concur that the term should maybe be described in Puppy Mill if anywhere, and that this article should be deleted. Krb19 ( talk) 13:51, 3 January 2021 (UTC)
I also agree. The term is Ill-defined and the article contents could be merged with another article dealing with similar subject matter. Adondai ( talk) 01:47, 5 January 2021 (UTC)
This article is rather POV against "home-breeders". It sounds to me rather like professional breeders propaganda. Regards Loudenvier 16:27, 15 January 2007 (UTC)
I do NOT support merging this with Selective Breeding. The current article concentrates on the breeding issues with 'Backyard' operations but this is far from being the sole issue with regard to this type of breeder. Those other issues would be inappropriate for the Selective Breeding article. The SB article, IMHO, also already concentrates excessively on pet breeding concerns, merging this entry would unbalance it even more.
This article needs a rewrite, not deletion or merger. Any rewrite will run the risk of appearing NPOV as this is largely used as a pejorative term by and within the animal welfare community, so a lot of word like 'alleged', 'in the view of' etc. will be needed. Finding a 'neutral' definition will, I think, be almost impossible - this is NOT a neutral term , or at least it isn't often used as one. It can, however, be reported in a NPOV manner.-- BoatThing 11:27, 12 March 2007 (UTC)
I still see the problems reported earlier: this is essentially an attack upon the process. The article should be written with sources from all perspectives, avoiding propaganda.In looking for sources, remember that anecdotes are not encyclopedic content. DGG ( talk ) 16:20, 7 January 2014 (UTC)