![]() | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 | ← | Archive 3 | Archive 4 | Archive 5 |
I'm very concerned that Atsme is cherrypicking sources in the BSL section to try to make it seem that the breed has no genetic predisposition to aggression. There's no evidence that her opinions represent a scientific consensus, for example see [1]. And there are medical journal papers that find there is a risk in dog breed ownership [2] when it comes to pit bulls. Geogene ( talk) 18:27, 12 September 2022 (UTC)
These two full paragraphs on one recent paper in the journal Science:
Early DNA research found some genetic links between breed and behaviour, but those findings were based on a comparison of averages across breeds rather than individual dogs. A later DNA study published in April 2022 and overseen by Elinor Karlsson, director of vertebrate genomics at the Broad Institute, produced much different results, and was billed "the largest of its kind". [1] Researchers sequenced the DNA of 2155 dogs, examined the genetics, and surveyed owners and examined data of roughly 18,385 dogs. The conclusion was that most behavioural traits are heritable [heritability (h2) > 25%] whereas behaviour "only subtly differentiates breeds. Breed offers little predictive value for individuals, explaining just 9% of variation in behavior." [2]
Dog breeds that have been stereotyped as being aggressive, such as pit bull types, were not more aggressive than other dogs. Some breeds even defied their stereotypes. For example, the study found that pit bulls (though not an official AKC breed) were not more aggressive than other dogs, despite the centuries-old stigma of their pit fighting ancestry. The results of the research indicate that dog behaviour is "shaped by their environment, not their breed." [1]
References
This is excessive emphasis on one novel research finding that fails WP:UNDUE, WP:RECENTISM, and WP:PRIMARY. I suspect this will not be the last word in the heritability of dog behavior, and it would be better to use literature reviews to write that. Interestingly, one of the co-authors of that paper (Hekman) has told the AKC she would like people to stop misrepresenting her work, because she says, the breed of a dog does matter in terms of its behavior [4]. Geogene ( talk) 04:41, 14 September 2022 (UTC)
Regarding the other issues I already pointed out with this [6] (not an appropriate use of a quotation, and not an appropriate source for a scientific claim), it should be pointed out that the geneticist in question is Kris Irizarry of Western University [7]. Irizarry is affiliated with the National Canine Research Council [8], which is a subsidiary of the Animal Farm Foundation [9], which is an anti-BSL advocacy group [10]. I don't think it's quite appropriate to just present that quote as coming from a random, unnamed geneticist. Geogene ( talk) 02:14, 15 September 2022 (UTC)
Ok, FunkMonk, I do hope you won't blow a gasket but I made the following changes/updates: (1) added clarity where needed, (2) placed sections in proper order, (3) fixed/added citations & RS, (4) made all the conversions I could find, (5) made spelling comply with EngB, and (6) made sure everything was in compliance with NPOV, V and NOR. I'll probably read it again later this evening because I am kennel-blind right now but if you see anything glaring that needs to be fixed, please ping me. Atsme 💬 📧 17:53, 25 July 2022 (UTC)
According to WMF, due to this lack of clarity, individual editors who are considering removing watermarks "should seriously consider the legal issues involved and consider consulting an attorney before doing so" (see Wikilegal/Removal of watermarks from Commons images).Uhm...that tells me the WMF takes no responsibility for things editors do, which includes removing a watermark. See c:COM:WM Atsme 💬 📧 04:55, 16 September 2022 (UTC)
This [11] is garbage tier sourcing. Per WP:SCHOLARSHIP, popular books by non-experts are not what you should use to write about science, especially in controversial subject areas. Geogene ( talk) 04:26, 14 September 2022 (UTC)
So why not let me work on this FAC, and let the reviewers decide what should stay or go.is WP:OWN. Geogene ( talk) 02:52, 15 September 2022 (UTC)
@ Justlettersandnumbers: I had just moved the images to left and right, right before you undid the whole thing. I don't understand: why should all the images be on the right side of the page? -- Tryptofish ( talk) 21:11, 17 September 2022 (UTC)
I clarified the lead to balance with the body text, and provided "a concise overview of the article's topic" per MOS:LEAD. The reason Staffords are called Bull Terriers is important in establishing context. The lead also "summarizes the most important points, including any prominent controversies." I am undecided as to whether or not to add back the ancestral image of a bull-terrier with Dutch caption; however, for historic significance it should be included as it shows the size prior to further refinement when developing the modern breeds. Perhaps with text translation in the body in lieu of a caption would work? I do not want to eliminate important text for the sake of aesthetics. I am also not aware of any FA being rejected because of too many images, so if a diff exists that supports such an occurrence, please share it. My experiences as a former publisher and FA/GA promoter/reviewer tell me readers appreciate images – pictures speak a thousand words. As for the mastiff heritage, and the larger sized bulldog x mastiff crosses that were used for bull- and bear-baiting, keep in mind that it wasn't until those sports were outlawed and dog fighting went underground that the smaller Staffords were being developed.
It took nearly a century to get the Stafford recognized as a purebred by the Kennel Club (1935) because of the stigma of its fighting ancestry, and the fact that dog fighting was still a clandestine sport that favored the bull terrier crossbreeds. From a
BBC article: "Staffies come with a degree of baggage in that respect as they have emerged as a modern-day folk devil. Their reputation then may demarcate boundaries between social groups. Again, these boundaries may be defined along class lines."
The claims that iron workers and coal miners (chav culture?) are the creators of the modern Staffordshire falls more in line with story telling that omits factual details that are documented by the KC and other dog breed registries: It carried the name Staffordshire as the breed was developed in the “black country” of Staffordshire and northern parts of Birmingham.
What breeders had to do over the course of nearly half a century speaks volumes to the substantial developmental changes that had to be made in order to lose the stigma, and explains why the history of this breed is important, as is debunking the unsubstantiated, unverifiable claims and folk lore that created the term pit bull. The majority of our articles relative to pit bulls are an embarrassment for an encyclopedia, and need serious updating to eliminate the media hype, folk lore, inaccurate information and other anecdotal reports based on visual IDs proven to be untrustworthy, and that are quite simply uncorroborated and unverifiable.
My thoughts based on verifiable evidence and factual information, the Black Country was indeed industrialized (1680–1791), and there are stories of iron workers and coal miners who bred Stafford bull terrier crosses from a heterogeneous group of dogs bred for function but the modern development of the purebred Stafford that we know today was not limited to just that status of dog breeder. We do not know what pedigree of dogs were being bred in the Black Country, and apparently that became an issue for the KC as well, considering they initially rejected them as purebreds, and also later rejected the name Original Bull Terrier because they had already long since recognized the Hinks' Bull Terrier prior to breeders developing the round nose. The Bull Terrier pictures I had included that were since removed are important to the history of the Stafford. A similar story applies in the US when the AKC refused to recognize Staffords until 1974. To limit the development of the modern purebred to only iron workers & coal miners is inaccurate and rings of status-ism, and probably helps explain why we are now seeing articles about BSL being tainted by racism: Sage, Lewis & Clark Law School, and Nova Law Review. Keep in mind, Joe Dunn, founder of The Cradley Heath Club and show secretary, led the effort to get Staffords recognized by KC. He & his wife owned the old Cross Guns Pub where the organizational meeting took place. Others who worked with Dunn included Joe Mallen, a chainmaker, and Tom Walls, an actor, who also contributed to developing the breed, and helping to get it recognized by the KC as a purebred conformation show dog. Another group of individuals in the US did similar to get the Stafford recognized by the AKC. Atsme 💬 📧 14:22, 20 September 2022 (UTC)
So, is this or is this not a British breed of dog? With this edit I edited the lead to include this fairly basic piece of information, and also attempted to state in simple terms how and when this breed originated. That information was removed by Atsme with this edit, with the (partial) edit summary "Fix lead for accuracy". So, Atsme, do you actually believe that this is not a British breed, or merely that we just shouldn't bother to mention such a trivial detail in the lead? Does anyone else have any objection to those few sentences being restored to the beginning of the lead?
We read in the page that "Within the broad sweep of dog history, the story behind the modern Stafford is rather brief and somewhat confusing" and "The unregulated breeding history and inconsistent genetic makeup of the Stafford's early ancestry have led to misconceptions about its origins", but this is simply untrue or WP:OR. We know exactly how the breed originated, down to the name of the pub where the initial meeting was held and the names of at least some of those who were there; we know exactly what stock the breed derived from (the bull and terrier crosses). We know why the Kennel Club didn't at first want to accept breed name (because it included the word "original"), we know in which year a compromise was reached and the breed created (1935). Where is the confusion? I propose that we replace all that stuff with clear and simple outline of the history as reported in dozens (yes, literally dozens) of WP:RS. Any objection? Justlettersandnumbers ( talk) 20:41, 22 September 2022 (UTC)
But historical records suggest that the alaunt is likely the common ancestor shared by the bulldog and the mastiff, which was brought over from Asia. However, many say that bulldogs descended from mastiffs.And this study:
After 100 bootstraps, 91% of breeds (146/161) formed single, breed-specific nodes with 100% bootstrap support (Figure 1). Of the 15 breeds that did not meet these criteria, seven (Belgian Tervuren, Belgian sheepdog, Cane Corso, Bull terrier, Miniature Bull terrier, Rat terrier, American Hairless terrier) were part of two- or three-breed clades that were supported at 98% or greater,...And that same study states:
In this analysis, all of the bull and terrier crosses map to the terriers of Ireland and date to 1860-1870. This coincides perfectly with the historical descriptions that, though they do not clearly identify all breeds involved, report the popularity of dog contests in Ireland and the lack of stud book veracity, hence undocumented crosses, during this era of breed creation (Lee, 1894).Hmmm...Irish bred? I think for the sake of accuracy we stick with the science and documented evidence, rather than anecdotal claims. AKC, which has the largest DNA database in the world for dogs, published the following:
...modern DNA research has shown us that the idea of a single progenitor spawning all similar types of canines across the globe, from mastiffs to sighthounds, is simply false. Instead, these archetypal body styles – heavy boned and wrinkled, or light boned and aerodynamic, for example – emerged spontaneously in breed populations around the world.
I just ctrl-f:d "Staffordshire Bull Terrier" in this article. Would it be ok to use "Stafford" for subsequent mentions in article text? Not for quotes and titles of works, of course. Or even "SBT" if that is something sources do. Gråbergs Gråa Sång ( talk) 11:45, 16 September 2022 (UTC)
The following 2 quotes were removed from the article:
The biggest myth, though, is that pit bulls have danger in their DNA — going back to the original fighting “pits” in turn-of-the-century New York City through to the dog-fighting rings of recent decades — bred so that they’re born to kill.
But as a geneticist explains in “Pit Bull,” the likelihood that a dog bred for the worst behavior imaginable could somehow pass on its unique genetic heritage without it being diluted is “absolutely ludicrous.” Besides, dog aggression, as Dickey points out, is largely considered to be influenced most by a dog’s early development, and how it’s been socialized with other dogs and humans. ~Kelly Lauerman [1]
And
Any dog can be trained to be a bad dog, just as they can trained to be a good dog.
~Bill Lambert, The Kennel Club, Staffordshire bull terriers: A question of class? BBC (2015) [2]
Should they be allowed to remain in the article?
By: Atsme 💬 📧 15:54, 15 September 2022 (UTC) Updated: Added the RfC template to get wider input. Atsme 💬 📧 13:32, 17 September 2022 (UTC)
Sources
|
---|
|
Note: WP:WikiProject Dogs has been notified of this discussion. Atsme 💬 📧 19:00, 15 September 2022 (UTC)
Note: This RfC was added to Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style#Current Atsme 💬 📧 13:39, 17 September 2022 (UTC)
Should [they] be included in the article?— HTGS ( talk) 20:51, 17 September 2022 (UTC)
The quotes are notable by notable people. The edit summaries given for reverting them included an essay, and a scholarship claim. Dickey is a scholar, and Lambert is a figure of authority with Crufts, the worlds largest dog show sponsored by the Kennel Club Atsme 💬 📧 15:54, 15 September 2022 (UTC)
Atsme 💬 📧 15:52, 17 September 2022 (UTC)In some instances, quotations are preferred to text. For example: When dealing with a controversial subject. As per the WP:ATTRIBUTEPOV policy, biased statements of opinion can only be presented with attribution. Quotations are the simplest form of attribution. Editors of controversial subjects should quote the actual spoken or written words to refer to the most controversial ideas. Controversial ideas must never appear to be "from Wikipedia".
She points out that “pit bull” isn’t a breed but a social construct, including four breeds: the American pit bull terrier, the American Staffordshire terrier, the Staffordshire bull terrier and the American bully, but also any mixed-breed dog with a blocky head, white chest markings and a brindle coat.It helps to know some of the background of why the term pit bull is even used, and why the Staffordshire Bull Terrier in the UK is not banned in the UK, but they are banned and/or restricted in a few cities/counties in the US. That is the kind of information an encyclopedia is supposed to provide, and yet I'm getting this feedback to not provide it...perhaps not in the form of a quote box, but it does need to be included. Atsme 💬 📧 21:16, 17 September 2022 (UTC)
I've pointed out before that this article makes dubious a claim about nurture overriding nature, The results of the research indicate that dog behaviour is "shaped by their environment, not their breed".[53]
which is an
WP:EXTRAORDINARY claim based on a single, recent paper in the journal Science. There's a new paper out in Cell,
Domestic dog lineages reveal genetic drivers of behavioral diversification, that makes it fairly clear that it's the view of the scientific community as a whole that there are heritable differences in typical dog behavior between breeds, and that these differences are the result of selective breeding for specific tasks. And that these behaviors are actually older than the modern breeds themselves--for example, herding drive is older than any one of the modern herding breeds, but that all those breeds inherited their behaviors from the herding dog ancestors that pre-date breed formation. Quotes from the paper in Cell:
Canine behavioral diversification predates modern breed formation
Ancient non-coding variation drives working role-related dog behaviors
Selective breeding of domestic dogs has generated diverse breeds often optimized for performing specialized tasks. Despite the heritability of breed-typical behavioral traits, identification of causal loci has proven challenging due to the complexity of canine population structure.
We overcome longstanding difficulties in identifying genetic drivers of canine behavior by developing a framework for understanding relationships between breeds and the behaviors that define them
To produce dogs that will reliably display traits conducive to executing these functions, humans have selectively bred toward a variety of behavioral ideals. Therefore, genetic analyses of domestic dogs present a system for studying how behavioral diversity is biologically encoded, a consequential yet often intractable area of inquiry.
We also examined the distribution of kennel club groups within the embedding, establishing that C-BARQ captures behavioral tendencies among breeds with shared historical working roles (Figure 3B; Table S3A). For example, terriers largely clustered in the bottom left of the plot, consistent with predatory behavior and dog-directed aggression
This article should not continue to make claims that behavior and breed are unrelated to each other. Additionally, I'm concerned that similar content may have added to other articles. Emphases in the quotes above are mine. Geogene ( talk) 04:13, 19 December 2022 (UTC)
C-BARQ is a comprehensive and well-validated questionnaire for behavioral assessment composed of owner-reported numeric scores for 100 questions related to both breed group-typical and atypical or undesirable canine behaviors.Deep in the methods section, they say that:
C-BARQ survey data was compiled as of July 2021 and contained 67,970 responses. Scores for the 14 previously defined behavioral factors assessed in C-BARQ (trainability, stranger-directed aggression, owner-directed aggression, dog-directed aggression, familiar dog aggression, dog-directed fear, stranger-directed fear, nonsocial fear, touch sensitivity, separation-related problems, excitability, attachment/attention-seeking, predatory chasing, energy level) were calculated as averages of the raw response values for the corresponding questions.So, these data are the responses of dog owners to a survey. And there are patterns of some breeds showing more or less of a given behavioral trait (whether due to genetics or environment). They also say:
Our results revealed a unique repertoire of behavioral correlations for each lineage consistent with working role (see Table S3A); however, we also identified subsets of parallel behavior tendencies across lineages (Figure 3C; Table S3), underscoring the utility of identifying phenotypic and genotypic correlates within lineages versus across all breeds.(emphasis mine) That's a meaningful caveat – some behavioral tendencies go across breeds, and are not breed-specific.
The most significant positive correlations were between the herder lineage and non-social fear, and the terrier lineage and predatory chasing, the latter being consistent with working roles involving catching and killing prey.They then go on to examine those genetic variations, and they find that they are "non-coding variations". So – there are non-gene patterns that, for terriers, associate with being used as hunting dogs (not the same thing as dog fighting).
In response to the discussion so far, I have made some revisions:
[12],
[13]. In my opinion, these revisions are reasonable responses to the concerns that have been raised, while also respecting past discussions. (It's worth keeping in mind that the part about the Science study does already say that it: concluded that most behavioural traits are heritable
.) I have left the "unbalanced opinion" tag, at the end of the sentence that now reads Globally, pit bull-types including Staffordshire Bull Terriers have made local news for acts of aggression, but breed advocates have raised questions about the veracity of visual breed identification, and media hype.
I'm not seeing how that sentence is still in any way unbalanced, and I think the tag can be removed. --
Tryptofish (
talk)
23:55, 19 December 2022 (UTC)
I see an IP is removing that content, and being reverted. I'm not sure that a consensus exists to include it in the first place. It's a cherrypicked primary research paper that's being given UNDUE weight. Geogene ( talk) 16:40, 4 April 2023 (UTC)
However, a respected veterinary behavourist says the focus should be on "deed not breed" and says the data does not reflect the reality.Funny how no one pointed that out until I did just now. -- Tryptofish ( talk) 20:43, 5 April 2023 (UTC)
it's primarily epigenetics and training, with some element of selective breeding as wellis a false dichotomy, unless you're a Lysenkoist. The ABC is contrasting a single veterinary behaviorist's opinion with consensus reality that one particular breed is overrepresented in dog attacks. The one opinion doesn't hold weight. Geogene ( talk) 20:51, 5 April 2023 (UTC)
![]() | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 | ← | Archive 3 | Archive 4 | Archive 5 |
I'm very concerned that Atsme is cherrypicking sources in the BSL section to try to make it seem that the breed has no genetic predisposition to aggression. There's no evidence that her opinions represent a scientific consensus, for example see [1]. And there are medical journal papers that find there is a risk in dog breed ownership [2] when it comes to pit bulls. Geogene ( talk) 18:27, 12 September 2022 (UTC)
These two full paragraphs on one recent paper in the journal Science:
Early DNA research found some genetic links between breed and behaviour, but those findings were based on a comparison of averages across breeds rather than individual dogs. A later DNA study published in April 2022 and overseen by Elinor Karlsson, director of vertebrate genomics at the Broad Institute, produced much different results, and was billed "the largest of its kind". [1] Researchers sequenced the DNA of 2155 dogs, examined the genetics, and surveyed owners and examined data of roughly 18,385 dogs. The conclusion was that most behavioural traits are heritable [heritability (h2) > 25%] whereas behaviour "only subtly differentiates breeds. Breed offers little predictive value for individuals, explaining just 9% of variation in behavior." [2]
Dog breeds that have been stereotyped as being aggressive, such as pit bull types, were not more aggressive than other dogs. Some breeds even defied their stereotypes. For example, the study found that pit bulls (though not an official AKC breed) were not more aggressive than other dogs, despite the centuries-old stigma of their pit fighting ancestry. The results of the research indicate that dog behaviour is "shaped by their environment, not their breed." [1]
References
This is excessive emphasis on one novel research finding that fails WP:UNDUE, WP:RECENTISM, and WP:PRIMARY. I suspect this will not be the last word in the heritability of dog behavior, and it would be better to use literature reviews to write that. Interestingly, one of the co-authors of that paper (Hekman) has told the AKC she would like people to stop misrepresenting her work, because she says, the breed of a dog does matter in terms of its behavior [4]. Geogene ( talk) 04:41, 14 September 2022 (UTC)
Regarding the other issues I already pointed out with this [6] (not an appropriate use of a quotation, and not an appropriate source for a scientific claim), it should be pointed out that the geneticist in question is Kris Irizarry of Western University [7]. Irizarry is affiliated with the National Canine Research Council [8], which is a subsidiary of the Animal Farm Foundation [9], which is an anti-BSL advocacy group [10]. I don't think it's quite appropriate to just present that quote as coming from a random, unnamed geneticist. Geogene ( talk) 02:14, 15 September 2022 (UTC)
Ok, FunkMonk, I do hope you won't blow a gasket but I made the following changes/updates: (1) added clarity where needed, (2) placed sections in proper order, (3) fixed/added citations & RS, (4) made all the conversions I could find, (5) made spelling comply with EngB, and (6) made sure everything was in compliance with NPOV, V and NOR. I'll probably read it again later this evening because I am kennel-blind right now but if you see anything glaring that needs to be fixed, please ping me. Atsme 💬 📧 17:53, 25 July 2022 (UTC)
According to WMF, due to this lack of clarity, individual editors who are considering removing watermarks "should seriously consider the legal issues involved and consider consulting an attorney before doing so" (see Wikilegal/Removal of watermarks from Commons images).Uhm...that tells me the WMF takes no responsibility for things editors do, which includes removing a watermark. See c:COM:WM Atsme 💬 📧 04:55, 16 September 2022 (UTC)
This [11] is garbage tier sourcing. Per WP:SCHOLARSHIP, popular books by non-experts are not what you should use to write about science, especially in controversial subject areas. Geogene ( talk) 04:26, 14 September 2022 (UTC)
So why not let me work on this FAC, and let the reviewers decide what should stay or go.is WP:OWN. Geogene ( talk) 02:52, 15 September 2022 (UTC)
@ Justlettersandnumbers: I had just moved the images to left and right, right before you undid the whole thing. I don't understand: why should all the images be on the right side of the page? -- Tryptofish ( talk) 21:11, 17 September 2022 (UTC)
I clarified the lead to balance with the body text, and provided "a concise overview of the article's topic" per MOS:LEAD. The reason Staffords are called Bull Terriers is important in establishing context. The lead also "summarizes the most important points, including any prominent controversies." I am undecided as to whether or not to add back the ancestral image of a bull-terrier with Dutch caption; however, for historic significance it should be included as it shows the size prior to further refinement when developing the modern breeds. Perhaps with text translation in the body in lieu of a caption would work? I do not want to eliminate important text for the sake of aesthetics. I am also not aware of any FA being rejected because of too many images, so if a diff exists that supports such an occurrence, please share it. My experiences as a former publisher and FA/GA promoter/reviewer tell me readers appreciate images – pictures speak a thousand words. As for the mastiff heritage, and the larger sized bulldog x mastiff crosses that were used for bull- and bear-baiting, keep in mind that it wasn't until those sports were outlawed and dog fighting went underground that the smaller Staffords were being developed.
It took nearly a century to get the Stafford recognized as a purebred by the Kennel Club (1935) because of the stigma of its fighting ancestry, and the fact that dog fighting was still a clandestine sport that favored the bull terrier crossbreeds. From a
BBC article: "Staffies come with a degree of baggage in that respect as they have emerged as a modern-day folk devil. Their reputation then may demarcate boundaries between social groups. Again, these boundaries may be defined along class lines."
The claims that iron workers and coal miners (chav culture?) are the creators of the modern Staffordshire falls more in line with story telling that omits factual details that are documented by the KC and other dog breed registries: It carried the name Staffordshire as the breed was developed in the “black country” of Staffordshire and northern parts of Birmingham.
What breeders had to do over the course of nearly half a century speaks volumes to the substantial developmental changes that had to be made in order to lose the stigma, and explains why the history of this breed is important, as is debunking the unsubstantiated, unverifiable claims and folk lore that created the term pit bull. The majority of our articles relative to pit bulls are an embarrassment for an encyclopedia, and need serious updating to eliminate the media hype, folk lore, inaccurate information and other anecdotal reports based on visual IDs proven to be untrustworthy, and that are quite simply uncorroborated and unverifiable.
My thoughts based on verifiable evidence and factual information, the Black Country was indeed industrialized (1680–1791), and there are stories of iron workers and coal miners who bred Stafford bull terrier crosses from a heterogeneous group of dogs bred for function but the modern development of the purebred Stafford that we know today was not limited to just that status of dog breeder. We do not know what pedigree of dogs were being bred in the Black Country, and apparently that became an issue for the KC as well, considering they initially rejected them as purebreds, and also later rejected the name Original Bull Terrier because they had already long since recognized the Hinks' Bull Terrier prior to breeders developing the round nose. The Bull Terrier pictures I had included that were since removed are important to the history of the Stafford. A similar story applies in the US when the AKC refused to recognize Staffords until 1974. To limit the development of the modern purebred to only iron workers & coal miners is inaccurate and rings of status-ism, and probably helps explain why we are now seeing articles about BSL being tainted by racism: Sage, Lewis & Clark Law School, and Nova Law Review. Keep in mind, Joe Dunn, founder of The Cradley Heath Club and show secretary, led the effort to get Staffords recognized by KC. He & his wife owned the old Cross Guns Pub where the organizational meeting took place. Others who worked with Dunn included Joe Mallen, a chainmaker, and Tom Walls, an actor, who also contributed to developing the breed, and helping to get it recognized by the KC as a purebred conformation show dog. Another group of individuals in the US did similar to get the Stafford recognized by the AKC. Atsme 💬 📧 14:22, 20 September 2022 (UTC)
So, is this or is this not a British breed of dog? With this edit I edited the lead to include this fairly basic piece of information, and also attempted to state in simple terms how and when this breed originated. That information was removed by Atsme with this edit, with the (partial) edit summary "Fix lead for accuracy". So, Atsme, do you actually believe that this is not a British breed, or merely that we just shouldn't bother to mention such a trivial detail in the lead? Does anyone else have any objection to those few sentences being restored to the beginning of the lead?
We read in the page that "Within the broad sweep of dog history, the story behind the modern Stafford is rather brief and somewhat confusing" and "The unregulated breeding history and inconsistent genetic makeup of the Stafford's early ancestry have led to misconceptions about its origins", but this is simply untrue or WP:OR. We know exactly how the breed originated, down to the name of the pub where the initial meeting was held and the names of at least some of those who were there; we know exactly what stock the breed derived from (the bull and terrier crosses). We know why the Kennel Club didn't at first want to accept breed name (because it included the word "original"), we know in which year a compromise was reached and the breed created (1935). Where is the confusion? I propose that we replace all that stuff with clear and simple outline of the history as reported in dozens (yes, literally dozens) of WP:RS. Any objection? Justlettersandnumbers ( talk) 20:41, 22 September 2022 (UTC)
But historical records suggest that the alaunt is likely the common ancestor shared by the bulldog and the mastiff, which was brought over from Asia. However, many say that bulldogs descended from mastiffs.And this study:
After 100 bootstraps, 91% of breeds (146/161) formed single, breed-specific nodes with 100% bootstrap support (Figure 1). Of the 15 breeds that did not meet these criteria, seven (Belgian Tervuren, Belgian sheepdog, Cane Corso, Bull terrier, Miniature Bull terrier, Rat terrier, American Hairless terrier) were part of two- or three-breed clades that were supported at 98% or greater,...And that same study states:
In this analysis, all of the bull and terrier crosses map to the terriers of Ireland and date to 1860-1870. This coincides perfectly with the historical descriptions that, though they do not clearly identify all breeds involved, report the popularity of dog contests in Ireland and the lack of stud book veracity, hence undocumented crosses, during this era of breed creation (Lee, 1894).Hmmm...Irish bred? I think for the sake of accuracy we stick with the science and documented evidence, rather than anecdotal claims. AKC, which has the largest DNA database in the world for dogs, published the following:
...modern DNA research has shown us that the idea of a single progenitor spawning all similar types of canines across the globe, from mastiffs to sighthounds, is simply false. Instead, these archetypal body styles – heavy boned and wrinkled, or light boned and aerodynamic, for example – emerged spontaneously in breed populations around the world.
I just ctrl-f:d "Staffordshire Bull Terrier" in this article. Would it be ok to use "Stafford" for subsequent mentions in article text? Not for quotes and titles of works, of course. Or even "SBT" if that is something sources do. Gråbergs Gråa Sång ( talk) 11:45, 16 September 2022 (UTC)
The following 2 quotes were removed from the article:
The biggest myth, though, is that pit bulls have danger in their DNA — going back to the original fighting “pits” in turn-of-the-century New York City through to the dog-fighting rings of recent decades — bred so that they’re born to kill.
But as a geneticist explains in “Pit Bull,” the likelihood that a dog bred for the worst behavior imaginable could somehow pass on its unique genetic heritage without it being diluted is “absolutely ludicrous.” Besides, dog aggression, as Dickey points out, is largely considered to be influenced most by a dog’s early development, and how it’s been socialized with other dogs and humans. ~Kelly Lauerman [1]
And
Any dog can be trained to be a bad dog, just as they can trained to be a good dog.
~Bill Lambert, The Kennel Club, Staffordshire bull terriers: A question of class? BBC (2015) [2]
Should they be allowed to remain in the article?
By: Atsme 💬 📧 15:54, 15 September 2022 (UTC) Updated: Added the RfC template to get wider input. Atsme 💬 📧 13:32, 17 September 2022 (UTC)
Sources
|
---|
|
Note: WP:WikiProject Dogs has been notified of this discussion. Atsme 💬 📧 19:00, 15 September 2022 (UTC)
Note: This RfC was added to Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style#Current Atsme 💬 📧 13:39, 17 September 2022 (UTC)
Should [they] be included in the article?— HTGS ( talk) 20:51, 17 September 2022 (UTC)
The quotes are notable by notable people. The edit summaries given for reverting them included an essay, and a scholarship claim. Dickey is a scholar, and Lambert is a figure of authority with Crufts, the worlds largest dog show sponsored by the Kennel Club Atsme 💬 📧 15:54, 15 September 2022 (UTC)
Atsme 💬 📧 15:52, 17 September 2022 (UTC)In some instances, quotations are preferred to text. For example: When dealing with a controversial subject. As per the WP:ATTRIBUTEPOV policy, biased statements of opinion can only be presented with attribution. Quotations are the simplest form of attribution. Editors of controversial subjects should quote the actual spoken or written words to refer to the most controversial ideas. Controversial ideas must never appear to be "from Wikipedia".
She points out that “pit bull” isn’t a breed but a social construct, including four breeds: the American pit bull terrier, the American Staffordshire terrier, the Staffordshire bull terrier and the American bully, but also any mixed-breed dog with a blocky head, white chest markings and a brindle coat.It helps to know some of the background of why the term pit bull is even used, and why the Staffordshire Bull Terrier in the UK is not banned in the UK, but they are banned and/or restricted in a few cities/counties in the US. That is the kind of information an encyclopedia is supposed to provide, and yet I'm getting this feedback to not provide it...perhaps not in the form of a quote box, but it does need to be included. Atsme 💬 📧 21:16, 17 September 2022 (UTC)
I've pointed out before that this article makes dubious a claim about nurture overriding nature, The results of the research indicate that dog behaviour is "shaped by their environment, not their breed".[53]
which is an
WP:EXTRAORDINARY claim based on a single, recent paper in the journal Science. There's a new paper out in Cell,
Domestic dog lineages reveal genetic drivers of behavioral diversification, that makes it fairly clear that it's the view of the scientific community as a whole that there are heritable differences in typical dog behavior between breeds, and that these differences are the result of selective breeding for specific tasks. And that these behaviors are actually older than the modern breeds themselves--for example, herding drive is older than any one of the modern herding breeds, but that all those breeds inherited their behaviors from the herding dog ancestors that pre-date breed formation. Quotes from the paper in Cell:
Canine behavioral diversification predates modern breed formation
Ancient non-coding variation drives working role-related dog behaviors
Selective breeding of domestic dogs has generated diverse breeds often optimized for performing specialized tasks. Despite the heritability of breed-typical behavioral traits, identification of causal loci has proven challenging due to the complexity of canine population structure.
We overcome longstanding difficulties in identifying genetic drivers of canine behavior by developing a framework for understanding relationships between breeds and the behaviors that define them
To produce dogs that will reliably display traits conducive to executing these functions, humans have selectively bred toward a variety of behavioral ideals. Therefore, genetic analyses of domestic dogs present a system for studying how behavioral diversity is biologically encoded, a consequential yet often intractable area of inquiry.
We also examined the distribution of kennel club groups within the embedding, establishing that C-BARQ captures behavioral tendencies among breeds with shared historical working roles (Figure 3B; Table S3A). For example, terriers largely clustered in the bottom left of the plot, consistent with predatory behavior and dog-directed aggression
This article should not continue to make claims that behavior and breed are unrelated to each other. Additionally, I'm concerned that similar content may have added to other articles. Emphases in the quotes above are mine. Geogene ( talk) 04:13, 19 December 2022 (UTC)
C-BARQ is a comprehensive and well-validated questionnaire for behavioral assessment composed of owner-reported numeric scores for 100 questions related to both breed group-typical and atypical or undesirable canine behaviors.Deep in the methods section, they say that:
C-BARQ survey data was compiled as of July 2021 and contained 67,970 responses. Scores for the 14 previously defined behavioral factors assessed in C-BARQ (trainability, stranger-directed aggression, owner-directed aggression, dog-directed aggression, familiar dog aggression, dog-directed fear, stranger-directed fear, nonsocial fear, touch sensitivity, separation-related problems, excitability, attachment/attention-seeking, predatory chasing, energy level) were calculated as averages of the raw response values for the corresponding questions.So, these data are the responses of dog owners to a survey. And there are patterns of some breeds showing more or less of a given behavioral trait (whether due to genetics or environment). They also say:
Our results revealed a unique repertoire of behavioral correlations for each lineage consistent with working role (see Table S3A); however, we also identified subsets of parallel behavior tendencies across lineages (Figure 3C; Table S3), underscoring the utility of identifying phenotypic and genotypic correlates within lineages versus across all breeds.(emphasis mine) That's a meaningful caveat – some behavioral tendencies go across breeds, and are not breed-specific.
The most significant positive correlations were between the herder lineage and non-social fear, and the terrier lineage and predatory chasing, the latter being consistent with working roles involving catching and killing prey.They then go on to examine those genetic variations, and they find that they are "non-coding variations". So – there are non-gene patterns that, for terriers, associate with being used as hunting dogs (not the same thing as dog fighting).
In response to the discussion so far, I have made some revisions:
[12],
[13]. In my opinion, these revisions are reasonable responses to the concerns that have been raised, while also respecting past discussions. (It's worth keeping in mind that the part about the Science study does already say that it: concluded that most behavioural traits are heritable
.) I have left the "unbalanced opinion" tag, at the end of the sentence that now reads Globally, pit bull-types including Staffordshire Bull Terriers have made local news for acts of aggression, but breed advocates have raised questions about the veracity of visual breed identification, and media hype.
I'm not seeing how that sentence is still in any way unbalanced, and I think the tag can be removed. --
Tryptofish (
talk)
23:55, 19 December 2022 (UTC)
I see an IP is removing that content, and being reverted. I'm not sure that a consensus exists to include it in the first place. It's a cherrypicked primary research paper that's being given UNDUE weight. Geogene ( talk) 16:40, 4 April 2023 (UTC)
However, a respected veterinary behavourist says the focus should be on "deed not breed" and says the data does not reflect the reality.Funny how no one pointed that out until I did just now. -- Tryptofish ( talk) 20:43, 5 April 2023 (UTC)
it's primarily epigenetics and training, with some element of selective breeding as wellis a false dichotomy, unless you're a Lysenkoist. The ABC is contrasting a single veterinary behaviorist's opinion with consensus reality that one particular breed is overrepresented in dog attacks. The one opinion doesn't hold weight. Geogene ( talk) 20:51, 5 April 2023 (UTC)