![]() | This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
The "In Heraldry" section has a lot of basic facts about heraldry, but ZERO facts about the use of dogs in heraldry. Can someone elaborate or delete? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.160.228.162 ( talk) 02:04, 3 January 2014 (UTC)
Dogs in art is a redirect now. Hafspajen ( talk) 15:57, 24 January 2014 (UTC) Dog in art Hafspajen ( talk) 16:03, 24 January 2014 (UTC)
Sorry but I know nothing about Chinese dogs, except that Mao didn't liked them. There was some kind of start here with Japanese collection, but was never added due to lack of refs and literature. Anyone who can add details, why not. Hafspajen ( talk) 00:37, 4 February 2015 (UTC).
@ Hafspajen: Why you have changed the article title? I know that there is hardly any material that would speak about the non-western depiction, still there is some content about non-western depictions. OccultZone ( Talk • Contributions • Log) 11:25, 4 February 2015 (UTC)
There is no point in starting adding a lot of Oriental material when there are separate articles, like Dog in Chinese mythology. I can remove all non-Westen stuff. Hafspajen ( talk) 11:27, 4 February 2015 (UTC)
Most other cultures don't really depict dogs, other than in a religious context, and Islam and dogs, Dogs in Mesoamerican folklore and myth, Category:Dogs in Hinduism deals a bit with it, Dogs in religion deals a little with that part too. Maybe you expect me to write that article, but I won't. And I don't agree that my work should be copied and used in the other article. The only one that is missing is Dogs in Oriental art. You tagged this article because you thought it was plain ignorance, but it was not really that simple. As we take a look throughout art history there is an overwhelming presence of pets in painting in the Western art. The kind of depictions like the Portrait of Charles V with a Dog simply doesn't exists in other cultures. It started during the Middle Ages since then the dogs are pets as we know them today. They were brought the houses and were allowed to live in the house and cherished as part of the the family, even if this was happening mostly in the upper classes who could afford to feed them. And from the wey beginning it started with the Ancient Greek's preferance for dogs. The same middle class could afford to depict them too. Anybody can check it out at So actually, in the end we could simply move back the whole thing by stating this, too. Hafspajen ( talk) 23:29, 6 February 2015 (UTC)
I don't feel overly strongly, I guess, on the depiction-of-dogs deletion.
It all depends on how "depiction" is understood.
If the word is understood to mean "represent by or as if by a picture", then it would not be appropriate.
If, however, it were understood to also mean -- per the commonly accepted additional dictionary definition -- " "to describe (... something) using words, a story, etc.", then at minimum the description of dogs as as unclean scavengers, and representing faithfulness, under different religions, is relevant here. -- Epeefleche ( talk) 21:49, 19 March 2015 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Cultural depictions of the dog. 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.
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).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 10:23, 15 August 2017 (UTC)
![]() | This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
The "In Heraldry" section has a lot of basic facts about heraldry, but ZERO facts about the use of dogs in heraldry. Can someone elaborate or delete? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.160.228.162 ( talk) 02:04, 3 January 2014 (UTC)
Dogs in art is a redirect now. Hafspajen ( talk) 15:57, 24 January 2014 (UTC) Dog in art Hafspajen ( talk) 16:03, 24 January 2014 (UTC)
Sorry but I know nothing about Chinese dogs, except that Mao didn't liked them. There was some kind of start here with Japanese collection, but was never added due to lack of refs and literature. Anyone who can add details, why not. Hafspajen ( talk) 00:37, 4 February 2015 (UTC).
@ Hafspajen: Why you have changed the article title? I know that there is hardly any material that would speak about the non-western depiction, still there is some content about non-western depictions. OccultZone ( Talk • Contributions • Log) 11:25, 4 February 2015 (UTC)
There is no point in starting adding a lot of Oriental material when there are separate articles, like Dog in Chinese mythology. I can remove all non-Westen stuff. Hafspajen ( talk) 11:27, 4 February 2015 (UTC)
Most other cultures don't really depict dogs, other than in a religious context, and Islam and dogs, Dogs in Mesoamerican folklore and myth, Category:Dogs in Hinduism deals a bit with it, Dogs in religion deals a little with that part too. Maybe you expect me to write that article, but I won't. And I don't agree that my work should be copied and used in the other article. The only one that is missing is Dogs in Oriental art. You tagged this article because you thought it was plain ignorance, but it was not really that simple. As we take a look throughout art history there is an overwhelming presence of pets in painting in the Western art. The kind of depictions like the Portrait of Charles V with a Dog simply doesn't exists in other cultures. It started during the Middle Ages since then the dogs are pets as we know them today. They were brought the houses and were allowed to live in the house and cherished as part of the the family, even if this was happening mostly in the upper classes who could afford to feed them. And from the wey beginning it started with the Ancient Greek's preferance for dogs. The same middle class could afford to depict them too. Anybody can check it out at So actually, in the end we could simply move back the whole thing by stating this, too. Hafspajen ( talk) 23:29, 6 February 2015 (UTC)
I don't feel overly strongly, I guess, on the depiction-of-dogs deletion.
It all depends on how "depiction" is understood.
If the word is understood to mean "represent by or as if by a picture", then it would not be appropriate.
If, however, it were understood to also mean -- per the commonly accepted additional dictionary definition -- " "to describe (... something) using words, a story, etc.", then at minimum the description of dogs as as unclean scavengers, and representing faithfulness, under different religions, is relevant here. -- Epeefleche ( talk) 21:49, 19 March 2015 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Cultural depictions of the dog. 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.
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).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 10:23, 15 August 2017 (UTC)