Talk:Maltepoo

Untitled
Maltipoos,Maltapoos,Maltepoos ...well...we are here to discuss them. I have found in my years of breeding that Maltipoos are the best of the crossbreeds .By 'best " I mean they are happy ,carefree ,loving and people friendly .Most others are but for some reason the Maltipoo caught my attention right off the bat ! This is the general rule for maltipoos or at least for those I breed . I would be more than happy to discuss things that pertain to the maltipoo . So ,talk to me ! And add your photos of the Maltipoos here !Maltese-Poodle 23:00, 9 July 2007 (UT

ABOUT THIS SITE You need to remove any breeder from the links (refrences ) if you do not intend to put all breeders on ,considered an unfair evaluation of information .Most of what is said was copied from other sites ,so that would be an issue for other breeders that were online with similar info first but are redoing their sites at this time or have removed it to book form so it can no longer be copied .. Just my thoughts but I am sure breeders that have been on the net longer ,giving out valauable information will take umbrage to it. That should have been investagated first ,how long they have breed ,where they got their info before it was put on. All the links you have are external links .You are an information center leading to other sites. And nothing more. All Links on these sites should be under EXTERNAL LINKS. Thanks

I trust that my previous comment, pasted below, were removed on accident and not intentionally. Removed the following link as it requires an external application to view: You can also read the book about Maltipoos ,Meet the Maltipoo Book Series at ( http://www.flipviewer.com/fven/?opf=http://members2.myflipbooks.com/children123/meetthemaltipoo2.opf&ver=FlipAlbum ) This book is free to read.

Also removed the following link as it appears to primarily contain information about sales : "http://poos4u.net" See WP:LINKS for more information about appropriate external links. Maralia 01:24, 15 July 2007 (UTC)

To continue, in response to the above comment: I wholeheartedly agree that the article should not list one breeder (seller) while excluding others (however, no site that exists primarily to sell should be linked to at all). I had not reviewed the 'References' links; have now done so and will remove both, as they indeed appear to be sellers and not informational sites.

I did not interpret the other external link (http://maltipooclub-ivil.tripod.com)to be primarily a seller; it appears to be a club. Please advise if you interpret it differently, but it appears to be a relatively neutral source of information. Maralia 23:19, 15 July 2007 (UTC)

Sorry .I meant to copy /paste and I think I hit delete and deleted your post above because when I went to paste it ,it was not there. I am sorry about that. Yes I agree. Yes the link http://maltipooclub-ivil.tripod.com is a club ,started a few years ago and was the first site to offer neutral info is trying to get off the ground so to speak and is adding each time possible ,they also can be found working at maltipooclub.com and org and namcr.net ,building it and adding is their goal. So yes it is deemed fit. The members are working to goals set forth and trying to be as neutral as possible. Thank you for your deligance ,honesty and helpfullness and for setting this site straight. Somtimes a site has to be checked out and usually you will find the RIGHT way to go about it. I thank you ...we have had fun lately though trying to provr some points ...haven't we ? hehe ! Oh and for more info you may want to put on the club site All About the Maltipoo   http://maltepooclub-ivil.tripod.com  it is a sister site to the other site.

Oh and thank you again for being so patient with us.

The second article you have listed under external links that has an article about Maltipoos says that they need NO brushing .That is false ,they do need alot of grooming so that article is way off base and has no plausable information ,they also have a moderate active level and not a low one ..Can you correct it or delete it ? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Special:Contributions/ (talk)

Why does this site let people keep editing and putting false info on ? Do you have a person that oversees this page ,if not then I would be willing to do so. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 97.81.226.48 (talk) 19:52, August 26, 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for removing the site that does not give information correctly on Maltipoos , But where did the Maltipoo Club Site go ? That is a neutral site and should be on here in my opinion. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 97.81.226.48 (talk) 03:43, August 27, 2007 (UTC)

The references you chose are not well chosen except for  Miss Bonhams book but the other 2 are not so well done .. Just letting you know that the first reference is a breeder and has only bred them a couple years so not so much a knowlegeable person on the health of a maltipoo in later years and surely NOT an expert,not even close. There are other more detailed informative sites and information gatheings than that or are you in the business of promoting semi-knowelegable books ? I thought you were not. A book was put on that is free to the public and written by the Maltipoo Club Members was rejected by this site ,so what is going on ? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.14.27.40 (talk) 03:37, 31 August 2007 (UTC)

Margaret Bonhams book 'The Complete Idiots Guide to Designer Dogs " is well written ,well researched and Miss Bonham is an expert in her field ,has won awards in writting about animals and does all the research and gives credits in her books to those that have contributed to them.

However in Miss Hiltons book this below was a preview

quote: copied from original press release

Sample Chapter: Everything You Need to Know about Malt-I-Poo's

Malt-a-poos can vary in size from Tea-Cup under 4lbs, Tiny Toy 4-7lbs, Toy 7-10lbs, and Miniature 11-16 lbs. Breeding 4lb Maltese and 6lb Poodles can produce first generation Malt-a-poos that weigh anywhere from 4lbs to 11lbs as adults. For some reason the pups tend to be larger than the parents. Chi weighs 11 pounds, stands 11” at the shoulder and is 19” from nose to tail. Roxie weighs 11 pounds, stands 10” at the shoulder and is 18” from nose to tail. Vash weighs 6 pounds, is 9” at the shoulder and is 15” from nose to tail. All three had a 4lb Maltese father and a 6lb Poodle mother.

end quote .. Now since Miss Hilton has no idea what hybrid vigor is ,has never raise or bred a Poodle or a Maltese, has never bred a first generation maltipoo ,has only bred a few litters of  second generation Maltipoos 'for some reason the pups tend to be larger than the parents ' is not Everything there is to know about the maltipoo and snippets from here and there with no references to anyone that could have and more than apt did give  some help to know anything to put in the book and no credits given does not create an expert opinion as to everything a maltipoo is or is not. It takes years and years of research, breeding ,notation , questions and answers given and proven true over time ot even come close as to be able to SELL a book with that name and to be called expert should be given by your peers not by self.

The third one you let on I have no idea because I could not find them online. Book sales should be promoted by the publisher and promotion staff and as to what subject they contain and as to the reputation and experience of the author ,not an encylopedia ..

I believe I will contact the main persons at Wikipedia and see what they say about this issue. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.91.56.40 (talk) 16:33, 31 August 2007 (UTC)

also ,yes ,a reference is associated with a site or a person or other. If you are researching apples and you read that John Doe and Huey Doe both raise apples ,one granny apples and the other red delicious ,would you use John as red and huey as green as references to the apples they gave you the info from ...yes ,you certainly would not use Mary Doe even if Mary had information because she did not contribute ...therefore it is association or reference. To have a good enclyopedia ...you should only use references from those articles that gives percise detail and is in association with the encylopedia. The best info comes from Clubs ,not a writter unless all in book is proven true and the encylopedia got all its relavent info from it and has been proven without issues as to be perfect in explaination. Clubs are a combination of knowlege from different people gathered in one place ,most of the time sorted through and expanded to reach the best information. The Hybrid Club and the Maltipoo Club are good references and good examples of this. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.91.56.40 (talk) 21:40, 31 August 2007 (UTC)


 * No. Published documents can be cited as references; organizations and people cannot be cited directly. Please read Reliable sources for further information on what constitutes a reliable source - you can't cite a person or an organization as a source, although you may cite their published statements. The key thing to remember is that I - or any other reader - should be able to see where your statements are coming from by looking at your sources, perhaps with the help of a good library. Zetawoof(&zeta;) 01:17, 1 September 2007 (UTC)

Excuse me ,I am wrong in that you cannot use Published sources but I assumed the Published sources were only from experts and those that have given information to you ,my mistake .You can use published books and Miss Bonhams Books are worthy .Very much so ..however This is from your Wikipedia Sources link.

quote " Anyone can create a website or pay to have a book published, then claim to be an expert in a certain field. For that reason, self-published books, personal websites, and blogs are largely not acceptable as sources.[3]

Self-published material may, in some circumstances, be acceptable when produced by an established expert on the topic of the article whose work in the relevant field has previously been published by reliable third-party publications. However, caution should be exercised when using such sources: if the information in question is really worth reporting, someone else is likely to have done so." end quote.

Again I apologise for being wrong but I have read all your sources and publised materials need to be reviewed by peers first and foremost before they are considered reliable or am I wrong there also. PS ...I know what a library is but they are not an encylopedia ,they are collectors and renters of Books .All types (sorry I had to go for awhile and come back and finish my thoughts ) ,good ones and bad ones ,I know ,I checked out some that were terrible ! I still believe that simply because it is in a book does not make it noteworthy unless they happen to be expert and I do believe that Wilipedia agrees by what they have on can and cannots on sources page. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.14.27.64 (talk) 18:52, 1 September 2007 (UTC)

Images
Okay I may need your help here .The photos I put on have to be copywritted ? That started today ? Or can I use a simple tag stating they are free for You to display ? I am not sure about the process even though I am reading all the details on it at this time. Will finish tomorrow and do the tags but as I said ,can I copywrite myself or do I have to have them done so ? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Maltese-Poodle (talk • contribs) 00:38, 2 September 2007 (UTC)


 * Quite honestly, the single photo on the article right now is probably enough, unless you have an image which is significantly better than it. In brief, though, any image used on Wikipedia must either be licensed for free use or used under a claim of fair use when free images cannot be acquired (for example, when the topic being discussed is itself a copyrighted work). The GFDL is the standard license for Wikipedia content - if you want to make an image available for the use of Wikipedia, that's the license you should choose when uploading the image. If you want to add it to an image which you already uploaded, just edit the page and add the gfdl-self tag (assuming the image is your own work!).
 * As a general note, though, images used on Wikipedia shouldn't be heavily retouched. That means no borders or faded edges, like I see on some of those images. Also, please sign your comments (by typing ~ after your comment) - although SineBot is currently signing them for you, it's cleaner to just do the job yourself. Zetawoof(&zeta;) 01:12, 2 September 2007 (UTC)

Well,just delete them because I cannot nor will not give complete free use of any photo I have ,too many false people out there stealing them as it is and trying to sell something they do not own. You can see that clearly on alot of site listings for sales of animals, a Yorkiepoo breeder friend of mine found several of her photos being used for that purpose ,leading people to believe that they own the dogs and they are fakes and scammers .On the net you can never be too carefull ,so most breeders or owners would not attempt to sign over all rights to any photo in this day and time. Actually I thought this was a share knowledge site and photos also to better educate on all subjects. The photo you have is not that great of a maltipoo but it will do since the person signed it over for anyone to use. I can't do that as I stated ..too many scammers. A person has to have limits to be able to protect themselves and others that cuold fall for that gimmick .. Have a great day ! Maltese-Poodle 01:33, 2 September 2007 (UTC)


 * Fair enough. I've tagged those images for deletion. Zetawoof(&zeta;) 01:40, 2 September 2007 (UTC)

I sorta figured you would ! Are you associated with any Maltepoos or crossbreeds ? Maltese-Poodle 04:25, 2 September 2007 (UTC)


 * Nope. Haven't even owned one. Zetawoof(&zeta;) 04:27, 2 September 2007 (UTC)

name
Comments on renaming this to "Maltipoo" instead of "Maltepoo"? I'm no expert, but working with a lot of veterinary clinics I almost never see the spelling "Maltepoo", while the spelling "Maltipoo" (and the mildly amusing "Multipoo") are everywhere... Tomertalk 23:40, 18 October 2007 (UTC)

Maltepoo and Maltipoo were the first spellings ,breeders have taken it to the extreme though trying to come up with gimmick names ..Maltapoo was the next in line ,someone that could not spell more than apt came up with Multipoo ,I laughed when I saw that one for a week ,then came Maltese-Poodle ,Maltoodle ,Maltdoodle ,In Europe it is called Moodle ... So I am sure there is another one wating in the wings so to speak. This is suppose to be an online encylopedia ,so they should name all the quirky names as well as the three main accepted ones. But then they do not use online references ,makes no sense. Problem is this ...When clubs started registering them as Michellenous ,the first breeder to make apps were the spelling they used so it became a game more than anything so the correct spelling with clubs is Maltipoo or Malt-i-poo ,maltepoo,Maltapoo or Malt-a-poo ...Nothing anyone can do that would like to see this mess straightned out witrh clubs ,I know ,I tried to talk to a few and got nowhere ...Registrations are not important anyway ,they are registered as Michellenous and I have seen some maltipoos that I swear were not that were registered as that ,so it is all a gimmick ..I will stay with the three main spellings ,all you can do.