![]() | This page 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. |
From the article "It is believed that Julius Caesar founded a stud for the ponies on the shores of Lake Bala."
It may be believed, but JC only spent a short time in South East England, Wales did not see a Roman until the Roman conquest of Britain and that invasion started in AD 43 decades after JC visits in 54 and 55 BC. So it is very unlikely he founded a stud farm on the shores of Lake Bala. Before reinstating please provide a reliable source ( WP:PROVEIT) -- PBS ( talk) 16:22, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
This ref is used extensively in this article. Unfortunately, while some of the material appears plausible, other things are surely very doubtful, or unknowable. None of it whatsoever is referenced. For example:
I can't see that this ref is much use at all: it's a tertiary source, without its own refs, full of what amounts to speculation, so is surely not a reliable source for any of its info. I think we can really only include material from this site if we can find and ref the original sources. Richard New Forest ( talk) 21:21, 23 August 2009 (UTC)
OK, I went through and pretty much tweaked almost everything a bit. I restored much of the previous material (much was sourced, and a LOT of it was mine, the rest was older stuff I did a big rewrite on about two or three years ago) I also tried to keep a lot of what Dana added. (Please forgive me if I separated sources from their content) I reworded some material, rearranged a bunch of stuff. (Drives me nuts when registries admit their breed registry is 100 years old but then claim their pure breed saved the world 500 years ago...I swear to god all of them do it, too!) I feel it was necessary to keep the sections separate -- they really aren't virtually identical animals other than size and those who care about the distinctions care so much that when I started on wiki, there were four separate "breed" articles on each section. (That said, I'm sure there is a political faction wanting to say they are all the same...)
About all I tossed completely was either material that read like a digression or material that I felt was either duplicative or unnecessary. Richard is right that some of the historical claims are really iffy. What I couldn't salvage by weaseling the language, I tagged as "dubious" the ones that I think need verification from another source. I also tossed some stuff completely when it seemed totally off the wall. (grays are RARE?? Not in the pacific northwest they aren't...) To that note, I will note that the Okie State (OSU) site is personally my "better than nothing" site for sourcing because I have noticed that where it doesn't just quote registry material verbatim it seems to have more questionable material than a university source should contain. IMH is also guilty of reprinting registry propaganda in their breeds of the world section, though usually their historical material is better sourced.
So, basically, what I am questioning is the stuff naming specific foundation animals. I re-added it back in even though I have no clue as to a source. It was added by some other editor and I don't recall who. I don't know if it can be sourced, but on the other hand, mention of major foundation animals, especially ones that died 100 years ago, is done in other articles and may be useful (Richard? Input??). I also have no idea what to do with the cutesy pony trivia. Someone cared enough to add it once, so I put it back in, hiding at the bottom. We can decide to incorporate or toss as needed.
Anyway, onward. Sorry that I jumped in on this one and made so many changes, but it was one I did a lot of work on once and so I care. Feel free to tweak and discuss further! :-) Montanabw (talk) 05:32, 24 August 2009 (UTC)
There is no upper height limit for Welsh Section Ds in the UK, see the following link for the WPCS breed description: Section D breed description
In general very large section Ds are frowned upon as they can loose a lot of their pony type but are not actually wrong.
Ideally, this article should be entitled Welsh Pony and Cob, as the "Welsh Pony" name is really reserved over here for the Welsh Section B. Section A = Welsh Mountain pony, Section B = Welsh Pony, Section C = Welsh Pony of Cob Type, and Section D = Welsh Cob. And the biggest of the Section D's are definitely not 'ponies' by anyone's measure, lol! ( ThatPeskyCommoner ( talk) 06:22, 18 February 2011 (UTC))
That weren't me (unless I have amnesia)! But the move was me :o) I think I cleaned up OK ( ThatPeskyCommoner ( talk) 06:35, 20 February 2011 (UTC))
"a "draft horse" references a type, not a job (Morgans were farm horses, too, but in no way a draft/draught horse". Hmmm, not so, I'm afraid; draught comes from draw, which means pull, as in draught beer. I don't have OED access at the moment, so will have to make do with lesser sources:
Draught-ponies were used in their thousands or tens of thousands in 19th century Britain, particularly in mining. I think there's an article about it at Pit pony. Yep, it's there. Needs a good edit too. Not just coal mines, but lead, tin, you name it. Justlettersandnumbers ( talk) 23:18, 1 April 2011 (UTC)
JLAN, please chill! The horsey world has traditionally very often had slightly different interpretations of 'standard' words, and in a horsey article it's important to use the words as they'd be used in the relevant horsey environment. There is no need to get really nitpicky about thins, and certainly no need to use confrontational language like "patently sheer blithering mindless nonsense". Pesky ( talk) 11:40, 4 April 2011 (UTC)
![]() | This page 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. |
From the article "It is believed that Julius Caesar founded a stud for the ponies on the shores of Lake Bala."
It may be believed, but JC only spent a short time in South East England, Wales did not see a Roman until the Roman conquest of Britain and that invasion started in AD 43 decades after JC visits in 54 and 55 BC. So it is very unlikely he founded a stud farm on the shores of Lake Bala. Before reinstating please provide a reliable source ( WP:PROVEIT) -- PBS ( talk) 16:22, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
This ref is used extensively in this article. Unfortunately, while some of the material appears plausible, other things are surely very doubtful, or unknowable. None of it whatsoever is referenced. For example:
I can't see that this ref is much use at all: it's a tertiary source, without its own refs, full of what amounts to speculation, so is surely not a reliable source for any of its info. I think we can really only include material from this site if we can find and ref the original sources. Richard New Forest ( talk) 21:21, 23 August 2009 (UTC)
OK, I went through and pretty much tweaked almost everything a bit. I restored much of the previous material (much was sourced, and a LOT of it was mine, the rest was older stuff I did a big rewrite on about two or three years ago) I also tried to keep a lot of what Dana added. (Please forgive me if I separated sources from their content) I reworded some material, rearranged a bunch of stuff. (Drives me nuts when registries admit their breed registry is 100 years old but then claim their pure breed saved the world 500 years ago...I swear to god all of them do it, too!) I feel it was necessary to keep the sections separate -- they really aren't virtually identical animals other than size and those who care about the distinctions care so much that when I started on wiki, there were four separate "breed" articles on each section. (That said, I'm sure there is a political faction wanting to say they are all the same...)
About all I tossed completely was either material that read like a digression or material that I felt was either duplicative or unnecessary. Richard is right that some of the historical claims are really iffy. What I couldn't salvage by weaseling the language, I tagged as "dubious" the ones that I think need verification from another source. I also tossed some stuff completely when it seemed totally off the wall. (grays are RARE?? Not in the pacific northwest they aren't...) To that note, I will note that the Okie State (OSU) site is personally my "better than nothing" site for sourcing because I have noticed that where it doesn't just quote registry material verbatim it seems to have more questionable material than a university source should contain. IMH is also guilty of reprinting registry propaganda in their breeds of the world section, though usually their historical material is better sourced.
So, basically, what I am questioning is the stuff naming specific foundation animals. I re-added it back in even though I have no clue as to a source. It was added by some other editor and I don't recall who. I don't know if it can be sourced, but on the other hand, mention of major foundation animals, especially ones that died 100 years ago, is done in other articles and may be useful (Richard? Input??). I also have no idea what to do with the cutesy pony trivia. Someone cared enough to add it once, so I put it back in, hiding at the bottom. We can decide to incorporate or toss as needed.
Anyway, onward. Sorry that I jumped in on this one and made so many changes, but it was one I did a lot of work on once and so I care. Feel free to tweak and discuss further! :-) Montanabw (talk) 05:32, 24 August 2009 (UTC)
There is no upper height limit for Welsh Section Ds in the UK, see the following link for the WPCS breed description: Section D breed description
In general very large section Ds are frowned upon as they can loose a lot of their pony type but are not actually wrong.
Ideally, this article should be entitled Welsh Pony and Cob, as the "Welsh Pony" name is really reserved over here for the Welsh Section B. Section A = Welsh Mountain pony, Section B = Welsh Pony, Section C = Welsh Pony of Cob Type, and Section D = Welsh Cob. And the biggest of the Section D's are definitely not 'ponies' by anyone's measure, lol! ( ThatPeskyCommoner ( talk) 06:22, 18 February 2011 (UTC))
That weren't me (unless I have amnesia)! But the move was me :o) I think I cleaned up OK ( ThatPeskyCommoner ( talk) 06:35, 20 February 2011 (UTC))
"a "draft horse" references a type, not a job (Morgans were farm horses, too, but in no way a draft/draught horse". Hmmm, not so, I'm afraid; draught comes from draw, which means pull, as in draught beer. I don't have OED access at the moment, so will have to make do with lesser sources:
Draught-ponies were used in their thousands or tens of thousands in 19th century Britain, particularly in mining. I think there's an article about it at Pit pony. Yep, it's there. Needs a good edit too. Not just coal mines, but lead, tin, you name it. Justlettersandnumbers ( talk) 23:18, 1 April 2011 (UTC)
JLAN, please chill! The horsey world has traditionally very often had slightly different interpretations of 'standard' words, and in a horsey article it's important to use the words as they'd be used in the relevant horsey environment. There is no need to get really nitpicky about thins, and certainly no need to use confrontational language like "patently sheer blithering mindless nonsense". Pesky ( talk) 11:40, 4 April 2011 (UTC)