Misplaced Pages

Talk:Boxer (dog breed)

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Traumnovelle (talk | contribs) at 02:30, 12 March 2024 (→Requested move 6 March 2024: Reply). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Revision as of 02:30, 12 March 2024 by Traumnovelle (talk | contribs) (→Requested move 6 March 2024: Reply)(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Boxer (dog breed) article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.
Article policies
Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL
Archives: 1, 2, 3Auto-archiving period: 14 days 
This article is rated B-class on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale.
It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:
WikiProject iconDogs Mid‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Dogs, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles related to Canidae and commonly referred to as "dogs" and of which the domestic dog is but one of its many members, on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.DogsWikipedia:WikiProject DogsTemplate:WikiProject DogsDogs
MidThis article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
WikiProject Dogs To-do:

Here are some tasks you can do to help with WikiProject Dogs:


Archives

1, 2, 3


This page has archives. Sections older than 14 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III.

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 21 January 2019 and 10 May 2019. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Henrykate.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 16:10, 16 January 2022 (UTC)

Puppies are dogs.

Since puppies are dogs, then saying "dogs and puppies" is either like saying that puppies aren't dogs—which, of course, they are—or the redundancy of "dogs and dogs." So I propose a rewording from "puppies and dogs" to just "dogs," because by definition, the word "dog" is inclusive of all ages. Or in other words, old or young age is not specified by "dog" like it is by "puppy." (And to say just say "puppies and dogs" is like saying "puppies, and... some other species of animal," which is obviously not correct. But my edit was reverted, so I came here to discuss.

Thanks to anyone who understands this concept correctly and is willing to help form a consensus towards this correction by restoring, or supporting the restoration of, my editions to this effect. However, if editors absolutely feel the need to still be specific for some odd reason even though this article includes puppies with adult dogs, then let's correct the error in the more specific way by saying "puppies and adult dogs." Thanks. Thayve Sintar (talk) 08:40, 12 November 2017 (UTC)

Move discussion in progress

There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:Chihuahua (dog) which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. —RMCD bot 09:47, 30 October 2019 (UTC)

Too much Bullenbeisser in the Boxer summary?

I recently edited the second sentence below to clarify that the crossbreeding mentioned in the second sentence Is referencing the Bullenbeisser (not the Boxer). Do we even need the second sentence? Seems like a lot of talk about a different breed in the summary of the article. Maybe it should be discussed in the history section instead?

From Boxer article summary:

The Boxer was bred from the Old English Bulldog and the now extinct Bullenbeisser which became extinct by crossbreeding rather than by a decadence of the breed. The purpose of crossbreeding the Bullenbeisser was to increase the white color of the breed, and the necessity of producing thousands of dogs for one of the most popular breeds in the world. Maxmaximus22 (talk) 10:20, 21 January 2020 (UTC)

"Traits"

The size of the dog is listed as the United Kingdom Kennel Club target range for a show dog. It isn't reflective of the actual size of Boxers and undershoots even the American Kennel Club breed standards by around 15% by weight. I don't think the purpose of the article is to provide the British show dog judging criteria, so maybe it would make sense to edit the section to reflect the actual size of the dogs. The source of the 66-70lb weight range even specifies that it isn't indicative of the actual size of the breed, but their "ideal" dog. I'd be glad to do some more research to get a more accurate range. I was just looking for some input before I edit the page for accuracy's sake.

Perhaps if someone is keen on putting in the work, they can create a specific section for the different breed standards by region and/or organization. I just think the information would be more useful if it gave people who are unfamiliar with the breed a better idea of what the dog is like. I imagine there are more people interested in reading the article in terms of finding a pet than there are people looking to enter dog shows. 24.116.97.236 (talk) 06:16, 11 October 2023 (UTC)

Requested move 6 March 2024

It has been proposed in this section that multiple pages be renamed and moved.

A bot will list this discussion on the requested moves current discussions subpage within an hour of this tag being placed. The discussion may be closed 7 days after being opened, if consensus has been reached (see the closing instructions). Please base arguments on article title policy, and keep discussion succinct and civil.

Please use {{subst:requested move}}. Do not use {{requested move/dated}} directly. Links: current log • target log • direct move

– per WP:NATDIS which favours an alternative common name over vague disambiguations as (dog) is often used for individuals such as Max (dog). Including references for every listed dog would be excessive but I have confirmed these names are in use in reliable sources. Traumnovelle (talk) 07:26, 6 March 2024 (UTC)

  • Move all to (dog breed) - (dog) is indeed usually used for individuals, which I think is a good way to handle it, but OP's WP:NATURALDIS alternative is very rare usage (I've never, for example, heard someone describe a "Chihuahua dog"... its just "Chihuahua"), so I'm offering a better parenthetical. -- Netoholic @ 20:57, 7 March 2024 (UTC)
    It isn't rare usage at all, here is 'Chihuahua dog' used in multiple reliable sources: Traumnovelle (talk) 21:56, 7 March 2024 (UTC)
    Cherry picking, particularly the Google link - I could find just as many sources for almost any two-word combination. (btw refactored your sources to not use ref/reflist because it breaks up the thread. Plain links are sufficient for a talk page.) Most of your sources are devoted to specific dogs, not coverage of the dog breed itself. -- Netoholic @ 20:52, 9 March 2024 (UTC)
    all of these are specifically about the breed. It isn't a rare usage at all and many people would say 'I have a Chihuahua dog' when asked if they have any pets. It doesn't need to be as common as the other form for it to be a natural disambiguation title. Traumnovelle (talk) 20:58, 9 March 2024 (UTC)
  • Oppose. These constructions are very unnatural. —  AjaxSmack  02:05, 10 March 2024 (UTC) / No objection to the (dog breed) suggestion. —  AjaxSmack  23:57, 11 March 2024 (UTC)
    They are natural, normal people don't say 'I saw a Harrier', most people would have no idea what you're talking about.
    For Boxer dog: .
    For Barbet dog: https://www.proquest.com/openview/fe25cbd38830ec276d58e55d1a2cd4a5/1?pq-origsite=gscholar&cbl=18750
    For Harrier dog:
    For Chinook dog:
    For Talbot dog:
    For St. Bernard dog/Saint Bernard dog:
    Traumnovelle (talk) 03:35, 10 March 2024 (UTC)
    I didn't say never used, I said unnatural. Your right about not saying "I saw a Harrier" due to confusion with e.g. Harrier jump jets or the birds called harriers, but that does not eo ipso mean that the phrase "Harrier dog" is common. Plus, this RM is a multimove with other titles like Chihuahua and St Bernard that are unambiguous in the phrase "I saw a...". —  AjaxSmack  15:33, 10 March 2024 (UTC)
    You're simply incorrect to say it's unnatural, it's used in multiple reliable sources and violates no rules of English grammar.
    That very specific ngram doesn't change that 'Chihuahua dog' is used as a common name by multiple reliable sources that wouldn't allow for any unnatural phrasing to be published. The St. Bernard one shows that it's roughly 20% as common however which is definitely common enough to qualify as an alternate name for disambiguation. Traumnovelle (talk) 18:44, 10 March 2024 (UTC)
  • Oppose per above. No objection to the (dog breed) suggestion. 162 etc. (talk) 05:46, 11 March 2024 (UTC)
  • Comment Note similar ongoing RMs at Talk:Brittany (dog), Talk:Feist (dog), and Talk:Akita (dog). 162 etc. (talk) 05:59, 11 March 2024 (UTC)
  • Move all to "(dog breed)" disambiguation. The proposed titles, while they are WP:NATURAL disambiguation, fail that policy's instruction to avoid obscure names for the sake of naturalism; instead, using a DAB that more clearly identifies the article scope is the best solution. ModernDayTrilobite (talk • contribs) 15:55, 11 March 2024 (UTC)
    That's outlandish to suggest they're obscure, not only are all of these forms well attested in print, academic writing, news, and colloquial speech - they are also incredibly easy to understand to someone with absolutely no idea of the subject. No reasonable person is going to find the name dog as obscure as displayed by the dozens of dog and non-dog articles already using this style of disambiguation. Traumnovelle (talk) 18:49, 11 March 2024 (UTC)
    They're not obscure in the sense that people won't understand them, they're obscure in the sense that they're not widely used names for what they describe. I don't doubt that it's possible to dig up sources that refer to a "Boxer dog" verbatim, but the large majority simply call it a Boxer, and so it's more helpful to readers to convey to them the best-known name. ModernDayTrilobite (talk • contribs) 20:26, 11 March 2024 (UTC)
    They're used in a variety of reliable sources that I am happy to provide.
    >but the large majority simply call it a Boxer
    This is your bias, people in Mexico are more likely to say Chihuahua dog and people in countries where pedigree non-working dogs are uncommon are going to be more likely to say Boxer dog than just Boxer.
    >and so it's more helpful to readers to convey to them the best-known name
    That isn't what the policy on article titles and natural disambiguation suggests: see WP:NATDIS. The policy is to avoid ambiguous titles as well as parentheses when a less common alternate name exists. Readers will see the official breed name in the article itself or when hovering over the hyperlink and no information is lost to any reader because the article title is Boxer dog instead of Boxer (dog), Boxer (dog breed), or even Boxer; more information is actually conveyed by the natural title. Traumnovelle (talk) 02:30, 12 March 2024 (UTC)
Categories: