This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Agriculture: Livestock Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Agriculture, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of agriculture on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.AgricultureWikipedia:WikiProject AgricultureTemplate:WikiProject AgricultureAgriculture articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. This article is supported by the Livestock task force (assessed as Low-importance). South Africa Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject South Africa, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of South Africa on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.South AfricaWikipedia:WikiProject South AfricaTemplate:WikiProject South AfricaSouth Africa articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. Mammals Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Mammals, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of mammal-related subjects on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.MammalsWikipedia:WikiProject MammalsTemplate:WikiProject Mammalsmammal articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

KEEP - The creator of this article could probably provide more information as I know nothing about sheep. However, from other sources on the internet, it appears that the SAMM is not a product, but a breed of sheep.-- JeffJ ( talk) 05:45, 10 May 2008 (UTC) reply

KEEP -- there are articles about many of the sheep breeds of the world, even the less common ones, this one easily qualifies as suitable to keep. However, I would recommend that it be moved to have the article titled by its full name rather than the acronym, and the acronym being a redirect (or if there are other things with this acroym, it could also be a disambiguation page) But DEFINITELY KEEP. Montanabw ^(talk) 02:13, 11 May 2008 (UTC) reply

Keep. Likewise: rename to full title, with redirect from acronym. -- Richard New Forest ( talk) 09:28, 11 May 2008 (UTC) reply

I can do redirect and rename unless someone else objects or beats me to it. Montanabw ^(talk) 22:07, 12 May 2008 (UTC) reply

The article's current image is poor. It is requested that a better image or photograph be included in this article to improve its quality. Coycan ( talk) 23:31, 18 August 2010 (UTC) reply