Talk:Mountain dog

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

?[edit]

I'm unclear what the difference is between the subject of this article, Mountain dog and Livestock guardian dog. There is certainly a great deal of overlap. Should we merge them? Richard New Forest (talk) 20:19, 14 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

There is overlap. The lines between classes and functions are not clear. One only has to look at the "group" histories of the American Kennel Club, Federation Cynologique Internationale, Canadian Kennel Club United Kennel Club and The Kennel Club(Great Britain) (just to name a few) to see that there is a lot of room -- even among professionals -- for overlap and disagreement as to proper location and where to draw lines between groups, and to place dogs within groups. I suggest, however, that they are not synonyms. They could be merged, but then we might need a disambiguation page to pick up the nondog stuff. If they were merged, then we need redirects. There also were some basic new thoughts (not a lot) that appear in one article and not the other, and that would need to be taken care of. I do think that the articles have different foci. 7&6=thirteen (talk) 21:43, 14 January 2011 (UTC) Stan[reply]
If the only difference is the dab material (see below), then why not merge? Are there any mountain dogs which are not LGDs? Are there any LGDs which are not mountain dogs? Richard New Forest (talk) 23:21, 14 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I tried Google Scholar but I can't find what I'm looking for, so I can't be sure but here's my theory please agree. There seems to be a cluster of breeds on one hand and the job they dominate on the other, and they are tough to tease apart. We'd like an article to discuss all these "mountain dogs" here, for example, to know their relation to the mastiffs and the other branches, it'd be great.
On the other hand, the "mountain dog" branch of breeds all do the same job, livestock guardian dog, and although you have to assume that they can't be the only dogs to ever be bred or used for guarding livestock, even in the particular way that they do, they are so good at it they are all people use in this way anymore. We also have an article livestock guarding dog about a job that they do, but as this cluster of breeds that seem to be a family are simply the best at it. So what we have here seems to be a venn diagram of two referents that pretty much overlap but maybe not perfectly: the branch on the dog family tree, and the job that they monopolize. So it looks like we could just merge the two if we want.
We could merge by letting this article go back to being a disambiguation page and then explain it and talk about these related breeds of dogs there as best we can. Has anyone ever heard of book or anything about "the Central Eurasian Livestock Guardian Dog Branch of The Dog Family Tree" which refers to them as simply "Mountain Dogs"? I can't find the term used for the referent but I'm still looking. It'd be hard to justify calling them all "The Mountain Dogs", that might be unnecesary WP:SYNTHESIS that will be obvious to the reader who navigates to the articles that a Mountain Dog (disambiguation) page would simply list and let the reader notice the clade for himself. Chrisrus (talk) 04:52, 26 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

FWIW, the viewership statistics above indicate that our readers get some utility from this article. 7&6=thirteen (☎) 21:47, 28 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Other dogs and animals[edit]

I also note that you limited the article, and cut out the following, which are not within the ambit of Livestock guardian dog. I put them back.

Quite apart from the working dogs listed above, are the following:

  1. Montenegrin Mountain Hound is a rare breed used for hunting from mountain regions across the Balkans. The breed was formerly known as the Yugoslavian Mountain Hound
  2. Formosan Mountain Dog commonly referred to as simply Formosan, and also known as Taiwanese Dog/Canis
  3. Honshū Wolf, known in Japan as the Japanese Wolf (ニホンオオカミ（日本狼）, Nihon Ōkami, Canis lupus hodophilax), Yamainu (ヤマイヌ（豺、犲、山犬）, "Mountain Dog"), or simply Wolf (オオカミ（狼）, Ōkami), is one of the two extinct subspecies of the Gray Wolf once endemic to the islands of Japan

7&6=thirteen (talk) 21:53, 14 January 2011 (UTC) Stan[reply]

I removed those because they are not part of the same subject (apologies: I'm afraid I did it again before seeing your post here). WP articles are about one thing, in this case a general type of dog. They are not about a word or term, such as "mountain dog", which would make the article a dictionary definition and it would belong in Wiktionary, not here. If those other meanings need to be mentioned at all they should go in a separate dab, such as Mountain dog (disambiguation). (Not sure what the wolf is doing here at all as it is not a dog nor is it called "mountain dog".) Richard New Forest (talk) 23:21, 14 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I put them back. The meaning and concept of "Mountain dog" as it applies to canidae and the definition is what this article is about. The wolf is called a "mountain dog" in Japanese. It would be nice if you actually looked at things before you deleted them. I apologize for reverting you, but like you, I had not seen your posting here. I should have merely used "undo." This article as it stands is about one thing. 7&6=thirteen (talk) 01:17, 15 January 2011 (UTC) Stan[reply]
So we are quite clear, your initial criticism was considered. We can take the geography and put it in a disambiguation page. But I put back this other material because it is an attempt to deal with common understanding and usage, which goes across cultures. 7&6=thirteen (talk) 01:37, 15 January 2011 (UTC) Stan[reply]
Created and put in a disambiguation page. That being said, there is not an identity between Livestock dog and Mountain dog. In particular, there are other canidae that are referred to by the phrase, as elucidated in the article, and they aren't covered. 7&6=thirteen (talk) 12:32, 15 January 2011 (UTC) Stan[reply]
You say that the wolf is "called a mountain dog in Japanese". This is a very clear example of a dictionary definition, as it depends on the words used in the name. The rest of the article covers mountain guardian dogs: the wolf is not a dog and I'm sure any relationship it has with livestock is not as a guardian(!), so this is a completely different use of the same term. The thing covered by this article is a particular and apparently fairly uniform type of domestic dog used for guarding livestock in mountain areas. To include the wolf, the Formosan dog and the hound we would have to define the article's subject as "some kind of canid with some kind of connection with mountains", which is far too woolly to be an encyclopaedic definition.
Quite apart from all that, there is in fact another good reason why the wolf cannot be included: it is only in Japanese that it's called "mountain dog". This is the English WP, and we can't cover every possible translation in every possible language: in English it's an unambiguous wolf. Would we include potatoes in the apple article just because they are called pommes de terre ("earth apples") in French...?
None of this is particularly controversial and it is not just my own opinion: the link I gave above to WP:DICTDEF describes WP's convention very well.
I'd still like to know how the mountain dogs in the main list differ from livestock guardian dogs. Richard New Forest (talk) 15:13, 15 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Discussion copied from User talk:Richard New Forest#Mountain dog:

I took your suggestions not only to heart, but acted upon them. I do think the article is improved as a result. Thank you. 7&6=thirteen (talk) 15:44, 15 January 2011 (UTC) Stan

No problem, but we still seem to have the "other dogs and animals" section... There is an argument for listing these in a "See also" section, but I can't see how to justify including them in the body of the article. Richard New Forest (talk) 17:57, 15 January 2011 (UTC) [End of copied material]

It still seems clear to me that the items in the "other dogs and animals" section do not belong in this article. Can anyone think of a justification for including them? Richard New Forest (talk) 14:07, 17 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

They are canids, and they are called "Mountain dogs." This informs the reader of their existence. While you evidently bring a scientist's 'need for order' to the article (and you want one subject narrowly defined), classification and groupings of dogs is also a matter of art, accident, personalities and history. This is as scientific as the subject matter allows. Like beauty, relevance is in the eyes of the beholder. You and I are at an impasse. 7&6=thirteen (talk) 14:27, 17 January 2011 (UTC) Stan[reply]
Please read the WP:DICTDEF guidance I linked before. There you will see that we do not include alternative meanings of the same terms in articles. Encyclopaedia articles are about things (by whatever name); dictionary definitions are about things called by the same words. To include other kinds of dog (let alone a wolf!) just because the words used to name them happen to be "mountain dog" is a dictionary definition, and, again, WP is not a dictionary. The place to inform people of other things called by the same term is in a disambiguation page.
None of this is controversial, but is a very well-accepted WP convention and we would need very good reasons to break it. No such reasons have been suggested. Please can we now remove this section. Richard New Forest (talk) 23:28, 17 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Other dogs and animals ==> See also
Made the foregoing indicated change. 7&6=thirteen (talk) 16:53, 18 January 2011 (UTC) Stan[reply]
Thanks. I've made the material into a more or less bare list, as recommended by WP:SEEALSO. Regards, Richard New Forest (talk) 17:56, 18 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Start Category ?[edit]

Why not start a category and include this article and those that it mentions? Might be fun. Anyone objections? Chrisrus (talk) 16:43, 25 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Chris, I agree, but there aren't a whole lot of contributors to this article. 7&6=thirteen (☎) 21:10, 25 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I agree as well -- it could even replace this article (though I don't know how much support that idea would receive). Anna talk 21:29, 25 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The article has some content, some useful internal links and is more accessible to what I think are 'average readers' than "categories". So I disagree with your latter suggestion, Anna. 7&6=thirteen (☎) 14:24, 26 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified (February 2018)[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Mountain dog. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

checkY An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 02:50, 7 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Undid the merger to Livestock guardian dog[edit]

Merger. Oppose You merged these. Without notifying the contributors! I created Mountain dog, and was not notified. You deleted Bernese Mountain Dog and Leonberger, proving the articles were not redundant or coterminous. There is no indication in the article history that this latest merger proposal was ever discussed or proposed at Mountain dog.

And you say "Mountain dog" is not in the sources for the Bernese Mountain Dog. YGBSM. 7&6=thirteen (☎) 17:30, 6 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Livestock guardian dog and Mountain dog[edit]

Discussion occurring at Talk:Livestock guardian dog#Merger proposal. Cavalryman (talk) 11:19, 7 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

There was an o'er hasty merger of the latter article into the former. They posted it on one page and left the other off. As the creator of the latter article, I would have thought somebody would have notified me. But merger discussions are subject to abuse and quiet rigging of the process. The merger discussions are NOW ongoing at Talk:Livestock guardian dog#Merger proposal and Talk:Mountain dog#Merger proposal. I wrote the latter article many years ago, and it needs additional sources, particularly ones that use the phrase "mountain dog." The breeds that are listed on these two pages do not completely overlap. 7&6=thirteen (☎) 21:17, 6 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Attribution[edit]

Text and references copied from Cão de Castro Laboreiro to Mountain dog, See former article's history for a list of contributors. 7&6=thirteen (☎) 03:19, 23 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Merger discussion continues[edit]

I know that the header on the article page is easy to overlook and disregard. However ... The discussion continues here. 7&6=thirteen (☎) 17:12, 30 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

RfC:Use of sources to establish a "mountain dog" type[edit]

An RfC has been made at Talk:Livestock guardian dog#RfC:Use of sources to establish a "mountain dog" type on the use of sources to establish the notability of this page. Cavalryman (talk) 11:07, 17 January 2020 (UTC).[reply]

Categories[edit]

@Cavalryman: You reverted my edit which removed {{disambiguation}} and added Category:Dog breeds. The page is not a disambiguation page: it lists only partial title matches, and has disambiguation page style errors (more than one blue link per line in the lead, and references). It is, however, useful, and would be better classified as an article. I think your objection is about the category. I've therefore removed the disambiguation tag and left it uncategorised. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 09:49, 23 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Shhhnotsoloud, thank you, I will think about how it should be categorised because as it stands there are no sources to support this as anything but a sometimes used part of a dog breed name. Cavalryman (talk) 19:40, 24 February 2020 (UTC).[reply]

Note to readers[edit]

Before this article was gutted, it had lots of information, links and sources. The phrase has a commonly understood meaning and is frequently use to describe various dog breeds. So you might want to click on the link. But I have no patience for edit warring over this. 7&6=thirteen (☎) 16:36, 10 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Background on the above complaint for editors / curious readers:[edit]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Livestock_guardian_dog#Merger_proposal

This is purely for reference to explain why this happened before anyone glances at the above diff and tries to restore on what looks like a very handsome article. Be sure to read this discussion before trying to recreate the page as it originally existed. If you believe the page should still be recreated please discuss it on this talk page first. Dronebogus (talk) 01:08, 21 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Mountain_dog&oldid=1196275873"