Equine Template‑class | |||||||
|
This template gives the American spelling "color" and "gray" but not all pages on which it is transcluded use American spelling (e.g. Tricoloured (horse)). I created a Commonwealth spelling version {{ Equine coat colours}} but it has been suggested that that be merged here. We could use something like {{Equine coat colors|sp=com}} instead but this is a little more tedious to input. Either way we've got to leave Commonwealth spelling as an option per WP:CONSISTENCY & WP:MOS#Consistency within articles. JIMp talk· cont 12:48, 3 July 2011 (UTC)
equine coat colors|sp=com
}} (whereas as it had been {{equine coat colours
}}) for Commonwealth spelling; the US spelling versions is the same as ever. Americans don't really use metres and litres much but you've still got your own way of spelling the units. Tricoloured may be rare in the US but when it does appear wouldn't it be spelt tricolored? The current version defaults to tricolored but, since you reckon it shouldn't I'll change it. As for enduring the "other" spelling, the reader will endure what ever spelling is used on the page but shouldn't have to endure inconsistency. IAR says "If a rule prevents you from improving or maintaining Wikipedia, ignore it." It is my position that by allowing the template to fit in with the spelling used elsewhere on the page I am improving Wikipedia. If a rule helps you improve or maintain Wikipedia, follow it.
JIMp
talk·
cont 23:56, 5 July 2011 (UTC)Ok, now that seal brown identifies, with sources, the term as restricted to EE_ At_, I'm for moving its entry up next to chestnut. I'm also for bringing gray down to "Markings and patterns".
1) Seal brown (At) is not genetically a type of black any more than bay is a type of black, and vice versa. 2) Gray is not a basic colour, it is a progressive pattern of white that can affect any basic colour. It is more comparable to Varnish roan than the basic colours. Ok, gray is kind of special in that it sometimes modifies the colour before removing it, but that doesn't always happen. -- Pitke ( talk) 08:33, 26 March 2013 (UTC)
Hm. Let's discuss. Seal Brown is a form of Agouti, and most often manifests on a dark bay, so placement with chestnut is not suitable genetically. I think it best remains in the "modifiers" section (for example, a seal brown base with roan creates a nice weird color that's almost blue roan, but not quite) even though it mostly modifies bays. Gray is, well, a gray area; it isn't a "pattern" because it's (ultimately) uniform -- certainly the end result is -- and it isn't at all like Varnish roan (which is just weird and rather unpredictable, it doesn't consistently lighten like gray does). I agree that Gray is not precisely a base color, and it does kind of modify a color, but not at birth (as would sooty, seal brown, etc...) it's unique, really, and it "trumps" every other color. However, my argument is that it is a gene present at birth, and detectable via DNA testing even before it begins to modify. I guess I think we should leave seal brown where it's at, but I'm open to more discussion about gray, though I don't think "patterns" is the right home for it. The "markings and patterns" section is the way it is because of the cropout problem, User:Countercanter (rightly) pointed out that the distinction between a marking and a pattern can be a fine one, particularly where the KIT gene is involved, hence that grouping. Montanabw (talk) 17:05, 26 March 2013 (UTC)
Anyway, if that helps clarify things any? Montanabw (talk) 00:05, 27 March 2013 (UTC)
I guess my thinking is twofold:
"Will this work?' I was thinking about your concerns, and would this fix the problem? Lean toward science a bit more: Put chestnut (e) and black (E) ONLY as base coat colors, then rename "other color modifiers" to something like "base coat color modifiers" and move Bay, Seal Brown and Gray to that. Put sooty and liver with the "Other" section at the bottom of the patterns, and maybe move that out of the "Patterns" section altogether. Maybe add some of the gene articles like agouti and such to the genetics and breeding section at the bottom as well? Thoughts? Maybe I'll play with this so you can see if you like it and if it solves the problem. Montanabw (talk) 19:06, 1 April 2013 (UTC)
Currently they're separated into Extension (black, chestnut) and Agouti (bay, seal brown). This is basically an arbitrary decision, it could just as easily be Extension (bay, chestnut) and Agouti (black, seal brown) or Extension (chestnut) and Agouti (bay, black, seal brown). I propose just merging them all into the base colors section and letting the articles explain the relation. Iamnotabunny ( talk) 05:51, 21 April 2019 (UTC)
I am going to go ahead and do this, as no one has replied. (In case further explanation is needed - A and E are both wildtype alleles, but around 2010 the most common explanation of horse color genetics started by assuming a and e instead. Some websites such as the UCD VGL that previously used this chestnut-based explanation have moved away from it since.) Iamnotabunny ( talk) 19:49, 2 April 2022 (UTC)
Equine Template‑class | |||||||
|
This template gives the American spelling "color" and "gray" but not all pages on which it is transcluded use American spelling (e.g. Tricoloured (horse)). I created a Commonwealth spelling version {{ Equine coat colours}} but it has been suggested that that be merged here. We could use something like {{Equine coat colors|sp=com}} instead but this is a little more tedious to input. Either way we've got to leave Commonwealth spelling as an option per WP:CONSISTENCY & WP:MOS#Consistency within articles. JIMp talk· cont 12:48, 3 July 2011 (UTC)
equine coat colors|sp=com
}} (whereas as it had been {{equine coat colours
}}) for Commonwealth spelling; the US spelling versions is the same as ever. Americans don't really use metres and litres much but you've still got your own way of spelling the units. Tricoloured may be rare in the US but when it does appear wouldn't it be spelt tricolored? The current version defaults to tricolored but, since you reckon it shouldn't I'll change it. As for enduring the "other" spelling, the reader will endure what ever spelling is used on the page but shouldn't have to endure inconsistency. IAR says "If a rule prevents you from improving or maintaining Wikipedia, ignore it." It is my position that by allowing the template to fit in with the spelling used elsewhere on the page I am improving Wikipedia. If a rule helps you improve or maintain Wikipedia, follow it.
JIMp
talk·
cont 23:56, 5 July 2011 (UTC)Ok, now that seal brown identifies, with sources, the term as restricted to EE_ At_, I'm for moving its entry up next to chestnut. I'm also for bringing gray down to "Markings and patterns".
1) Seal brown (At) is not genetically a type of black any more than bay is a type of black, and vice versa. 2) Gray is not a basic colour, it is a progressive pattern of white that can affect any basic colour. It is more comparable to Varnish roan than the basic colours. Ok, gray is kind of special in that it sometimes modifies the colour before removing it, but that doesn't always happen. -- Pitke ( talk) 08:33, 26 March 2013 (UTC)
Hm. Let's discuss. Seal Brown is a form of Agouti, and most often manifests on a dark bay, so placement with chestnut is not suitable genetically. I think it best remains in the "modifiers" section (for example, a seal brown base with roan creates a nice weird color that's almost blue roan, but not quite) even though it mostly modifies bays. Gray is, well, a gray area; it isn't a "pattern" because it's (ultimately) uniform -- certainly the end result is -- and it isn't at all like Varnish roan (which is just weird and rather unpredictable, it doesn't consistently lighten like gray does). I agree that Gray is not precisely a base color, and it does kind of modify a color, but not at birth (as would sooty, seal brown, etc...) it's unique, really, and it "trumps" every other color. However, my argument is that it is a gene present at birth, and detectable via DNA testing even before it begins to modify. I guess I think we should leave seal brown where it's at, but I'm open to more discussion about gray, though I don't think "patterns" is the right home for it. The "markings and patterns" section is the way it is because of the cropout problem, User:Countercanter (rightly) pointed out that the distinction between a marking and a pattern can be a fine one, particularly where the KIT gene is involved, hence that grouping. Montanabw (talk) 17:05, 26 March 2013 (UTC)
Anyway, if that helps clarify things any? Montanabw (talk) 00:05, 27 March 2013 (UTC)
I guess my thinking is twofold:
"Will this work?' I was thinking about your concerns, and would this fix the problem? Lean toward science a bit more: Put chestnut (e) and black (E) ONLY as base coat colors, then rename "other color modifiers" to something like "base coat color modifiers" and move Bay, Seal Brown and Gray to that. Put sooty and liver with the "Other" section at the bottom of the patterns, and maybe move that out of the "Patterns" section altogether. Maybe add some of the gene articles like agouti and such to the genetics and breeding section at the bottom as well? Thoughts? Maybe I'll play with this so you can see if you like it and if it solves the problem. Montanabw (talk) 19:06, 1 April 2013 (UTC)
Currently they're separated into Extension (black, chestnut) and Agouti (bay, seal brown). This is basically an arbitrary decision, it could just as easily be Extension (bay, chestnut) and Agouti (black, seal brown) or Extension (chestnut) and Agouti (bay, black, seal brown). I propose just merging them all into the base colors section and letting the articles explain the relation. Iamnotabunny ( talk) 05:51, 21 April 2019 (UTC)
I am going to go ahead and do this, as no one has replied. (In case further explanation is needed - A and E are both wildtype alleles, but around 2010 the most common explanation of horse color genetics started by assuming a and e instead. Some websites such as the UCD VGL that previously used this chestnut-based explanation have moved away from it since.) Iamnotabunny ( talk) 19:49, 2 April 2022 (UTC)