Talk:Zippy Chippy

NOT ENCYCLOPAEDIC AT ALL

See title. S/E. 74.116.151.58 06:30, 11 April 2007 (UTC)

Did Zippy write this? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.34.78.153 (talk) 00:42, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

If he did, bless 'em for it. 71.125.114.74 (talk) 05:20, 12 January 2008 (UTC)

I'm trying to clean this up for wiki. Anyone want to help?96.238.212.91 (talk) 02:17, 8 July 2008 (UTC)

This article is hilarious, but in no way appropriate for an encyclopedia. DavidSteinle (talk) 10:24, 23 December 2008 (UTC)

Jargon in need of explanation

'100 starts = 0-8-12' means what? I can guess that '100 starts' means that this unfortunate animal took part in (at least to the extent that he started) 100 races; but what does '= 0-9-12' mean? 31.52.252.150 (talk) 09:50, 20 November 2014 (UTC)

It means quite simply that he had no wins, nine seconds and twelve thirds (the infobox actually says eight seconds). Editrite! (talk) 00:22, 17 April 2022 (UTC)

Notability

I do not have the time to start a formal process, but I state for the record that I have some very serious doubts as to Zippy Chippy being sufficiently notable for Wikipedia. I suggest that the page be deleted as unencyclopedic trivia, else that significant proof of notability is provided. 80.226.24.10 (talk) 18:17, 9 June 2015 (UTC)

I'm not sure that this article is notable but I've done my best to clean it up and try to make it less cute. Leschnei (talk) 13:35, 24 July 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Zippy Chippy. 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:

• Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20070928064001/http://www.bloodhorse.com/articleindex/article.asp?id=5787 to http://www.bloodhorse.com/articleindex/article.asp?id=5787

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• 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) 22:20, 20 July 2016 (UTC)

Age is 31

Age as per all the sources is 31: [1], [2]. Horses ages increase on January 1 (in Northern Hemisphere). Why do certain users keeps reverting this back to age 30/31, which is applying a human-based counting system to an animal. And violating WP:OR, as all sources say aged 31. We shouldn't have factually incorrect information on an article that's linked from the main page. Joseph2302 (talk) 13:28, 21 April 2022 (UTC)

I agree with you. Luckily the RIGHTVERSION has been protected. SN54129 14:35, 22 April 2022 (UTC)

Because that is a silly system that is relevant only to classifying horses for racing and breeding. Far from being "factually incorrect" to change it based on actual date of birth (what horse breeders call "foaling"), it is factually incorrect to insist that an animal born in April magically becomes older in January just because horse breeders and racers like to have easy categorizations to use.--User:Khajidha (talk) (contributions) 20:12, 22 April 2022 (UTC)

Wikipedia is a tertiary aource, we should report what sources say. And sources say the horse was 31. Similar to how some countries use different systems for counting ages (which often make ages one higher than the Western system)- it isn't stupid, it's a different cultural way of doing things. Personally, I think we should create a template for horse ages, which includes a note about the age system. Joseph2302 (talk) 07:47, 23 April 2022 (UTC)

And you will notice that we don't use those other ways of counting human ages. We give all people's actual birth to death ages. I have no problem with having a note saying that a horse is officially counted as being a certain age. I do have a problem wih stating that they are a certain age when that is demonstrably, factually wrong. As for your point about what sources say, we don't quote sources when they are wrong.--User:Khajidha (talk) (contributions) 10:12, 23 April 2022 (UTC)

Khajidha stop re-adding 30/31, it is unsourced. All sources say 31. Joseph2302 (talk) 11:33, 25 April 2022 (UTC)

WP:VERIFY: All material in Wikipedia mainspace, including everything in articles, lists, and captions, must be verifiable. 30/31 is not verifiable, because it is not supported by any sources. Verifiability is a policy, and therefore must be followed. Joseph2302 (talk) 11:36, 25 April 2022 (UTC)

It is supported by the very sources that show the horse's foaling date. Basic calculations (like age at death based on birth date) are not original research.--User:Khajidha (talk) (contributions) 11:43, 25 April 2022 (UTC)

Protected page template required on article

I was passing through and noticed that there was no "protected page" template on the article. Can one be added please? Thanks. Urbanracer34 (talk) 15:07, 21 April 2022 (UTC)

Misread, there is a template already on the page. Urbanracer34 (talk) 16:21, 21 April 2022 (UTC)