Talk:Sergeant Stubby

Legacy Added
I have added a legacy to the article, in attempt to show what happened as a result of Stubby being with the US Army at the front in WWII, the numbers of dogs, branches, where, and that an attemt was made, if only for that war, to get the dogs returned to society.

—The preceding unsigned comment was added by Jai Raj (talk • contribs) 15:45, 16 March 2007 (UTC).

Breeds like Stubby are now banned in Denver, CO.
It's amazing how times have changed since Stubby was honored in WWI. In 1989, the Denver, CO City Council passed a resolution banning these types of dogs from the entire city and county of Denver.

Though this Wikipedia article doesn't say that Stubby is a "Pit Bull", the laws of Denver and many other cities would include Stubby in their breed specific ban only because of his physical characteristics without regard to his temperament or military status. According to the City and County of Denver, Colorado, a pit bull is defined in the ordinance as any dog that is an American Pit Bull Terrier, an American Staffordshire Terrier, a Staffordshire Bull Terrier, or any dog displaying the majority of physical traits of any one or more of these breeds. If Stubby were caught by Denver city or county goverment officials today, he would be put to death.

Denver's pit bull law prohibits any person from owning, possessing, keeping, exercising control over, maintaining, harboring, or selling a pit bull in the City and County of Denver. The misdemeanor penalty for owners harboring an illegal pit bull is a fine of up to $1,000 and a year in jail.

In 2004, Colorado Governor Bill Owens signed a bill prohibiting local governments from regulating a specific breed - which applied to pit bulls, although technically they are not a single breed. Denver suspended enforcement of its ban, but successfully challenged the state law and resumed enforcement of the ban in May of 2005.

The Humane Society of the United States opposes breed-specific bans such as Denver's because the organization says many factors, including how the dogs are treated, determines violence.

According to figures from the American Temperament Testing Society, a national nonprofit organization that promotes uniform temperament evaluations of dogs, the American pit-bull terrier passed its evaluations 83.4 percent of the time, just behind the golden retriever at 83.6.

Between May 9 and June 17 of 2005 more than 150 pit bulls and dogs with pit bull characteristics were put to death by order of Denver city and county government officials. --mtnkjn 16:56, 25 April 2006 (UTC)

Pit bulls are banned in the entire province of Ontario now, I do believe. - Lucky13pjn 07:39, 1 May 2006 (UTC)

And your point is...? 99.243.142.190 21:37, 17 September 2007 (UTC)

Who states Stubby is a pitbull? almost all research shows the breed is unknown, but he was believed to be a Boston Terrier mix. Regardless he is a mix and definitely not a pit. 72.37.244.140 (talk) 08:07, 27 December 2012 (UTC)

Poor pit bulls
Those poor pit bulls. Stubby looks so cute. This is a very adorable article. Any dog could be sweet or vicious depending how they are raised, so I guess I oppose a breed-specific ban too. It doesn't make sense. It would seem to only have PR benefits. Astrophil 17:10, 25 April 2006 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk pages are not the place to talk about that, go to a forum. 70.187.179.139 (talk) 20:06, 3 August 2012 (UTC)

Military service
Interesting story, but when and how was Stubby promoted to sergeant? (Who gave him the stripes? was it an honourary title, or did someone actually file the paperwork?). Just curious. Rod ESQ 17:17, 25 April 2006 (UTC)

I would have to do some more research, but as I recall the Marines gave him an honorary rank of sergeant, and then he was actually promoted by the Army and the paperwork was filed. I had to use the name "Sergeant Stubby", as "Stubby" was too vauge, and there were other entries with that name. Jai Raj


 * He was never promoted to Sgt. The military is not that ridiculous.  Nothing in this wiki page is properly referenced, it seems like most of it is based upon internet folklore spun by pit bull breed advocates.  PS Conroy was an a-hole for smuggling this dog over to the European Theater.  He should've found Stubby a nice home stateside.  I would NEVER take my dog to war because I love him too much.

He was Promoted to Sgt. He met 2 presidents and had the rank, it was offical. And how was Conroy a "A-Hole", People would have died if he hadnt brought Stubby, Stubby saved lives, He saved troops from Gas, he caught a German spy, he heard the whine of rockets before the troops heard them.

Military working dogs are currently given stripes just for serving. They also perform one of the most important jobs in the military. To call it ridiculous to rank a dog as an NCO is absurd.
 * Making a dog an NCO would be ridiculous. It can't do an NCO's job. It can't supervise soldiers, assign them to tasks, sort out a billet for them or listen to them when they have family troubles. A dog cannot be an NCO.--Fahrenheit666 (talk) 21:23, 17 October 2016 (UTC)

Georgetown
Interesting article. I do have a problem, however, with the sentence "Stubby attended Georgetown". Isn't it better to say "While John Robert Conroy attended Georgetown, Stubby was named mascot..." J. Van Meter 19:52, 25 April 2006 (UTC)

Circa birthdate
For Stubby to be several weeks old in 1917 could possibly indicate that he was born in late 1916. Unless a source can verify his actual birth-year of 1917, then it must be indicated as (c. 1917–1926) instead of just (1917–1926). However, in this source from the external links, it states, "Stubby was a mixed-breed mongrel, at least part Boston terrier, whose story began in 1916 at the Yale Bowl in New Haven, Conn." So, what's the birth-year: 1916, c. 1916, or 1917? According to this source, it is simply 1916. — №tǒŖïøŭş 4lĭfė   ♫   ♪  03:19, 6 June 2006 (UTC)

Additionally, one newspaper places his date of death at March 17th of 1926, not April 6th as claimed here. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 184.146.113.221 (talk) 00:02, 7 September 2013 (UTC)

Stubby is not a Boston Terrier!!
Why is Stubby listed as a Boston Terrier. It is a well known fact that he is a Pit Bull Terrier. Myndy lou 15:22, 16 March 2007 (UTC)


 * Stubby really was a mutt; I think what was called a tramp dog at the time. He had no breed.  He was actually quite small.  The picture in this article is taken from a larger picture of the Georgetown football team, and Stubby does not even come up to their knees.  Also, in the photo of Stubby and General Pershing, is is clear that he is very small.


 * Okay, if Stubby was a mutt, he shouldn't be listed as a BOSTON TERRIER. Every site that I go to lists him as either a "pit bull" or a "bull terrier". Nowhere can I find that he is a boston terrier. http://www.hssc.us/Sgt%20Stubby.htm
 * The reason why every site you visit has him listed as a pit is because pit bull breed advocates love to come up with lists of famous or celebrity owned pits in order to combat breed stigma. They bounce this information around a lot.  That's why you see so many sites with him as a pit bull.  Also, these sites and orgs tend not to do independent fact checking, they simply site or link to each other.  It is often impossible to pin down where they originally got their information and in some cases it is a circuit (A cites B, B cites C, and A cites C).  This is clearly evident as well with the pit bull nanny dog claim.  All pit bull sites seem to claim this and there is no convincing evidence in the historic record of pit bulls ever being commonly referred to as nanny dogs or anything close.  Be very skeptical of zealots, in other words.   — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.92.68.79 (talk) 23:18, 8 December 2011 (UTC)

http://www.pawsandclaws.com/stubby.htm

http://www.dawnrestdogs.org/HEROES_SGTSTUBBY.html

http://www.jinxmagazine.com/jd_stubby.html

http://www.uswardogs.org/id16.html

Also, if you click on the Connecticut Military link at the bottom of the excerpt, it also lists Stuby as a "bull terrier" Myndy lou 16:06, 16 March 2007 (UTC)


 * It makes sense that he was a mutt, based on the way he looks, though to me he most closely resembles a Staffordshire Bull Terrier: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Staffordshire_Bull_Terrier Señor snazzy pants   talk  00:53, 29 May 2012 (UTC)


 * Having owned both Boston Terriers and Staffordshire Bull Terriers, I can assure you he was a Boston, not a Staffordshire. The early Bostons were all brindle colored, like Stubby, and Stubby's physique resembles the leaner physique of a Boston over a Staffordshire. But since there is no reliable documentation either way, I have edited the article to simply say he is breed indeterminate. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2001:4898:0:FFF:0:5EFE:A50:5A6F (talk) 23:34, 31 July 2012 (UTC)

Sources?
Barely any of this information is sourced. Was stubby "the most decorated war dog of World War I and the only dog to be promoted to sergeant through combat" as the article says? I see no source for that. Also, none of the information in the "Life," "Military service" or "After the war" sections has sources either. How do we know somebody didn't just make it up? I propose that the unsourced material should be challenged or removed until proper sources are provided. 174.71.119.74 (talk) 20:18, 22 January 2012 (UTC)

Mr 174.71.119.74, there are several sources at the bottom of the article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jai Raj (talk • contribs) 17:58, 28 March 2012 (UTC)


 * Agreed this is not properly sourced. This is a nice story that pit bull fanciers cite back in forth on their web sites and it grows and morphs over time like a game of chinese whispers.  Give it 10 more years, and this page will reflect that it was actually General Stubby and that he flew a plane in battle. Wvguy8258 (talk) 05:37, 26 June 2012 (UTC)


 * Actually, I think he was elected president briefly after saving the world from fifty-foot robots 143.92.1.33 (talk) 08:49, 27 February 2013 (UTC)

No, Stubby was the dog of Plato. He was friends with a Black Russian Terrier in 1 BCE. Radioactiveplayful (talk) 23:27, 7 April 2013 (UTC)Radioactiveplayful

Sergeant Stubby's true breed
The statement that Sergeant Stubby was a pit bull terrier is referenced from a Staffordshire bull terrier club, which provides no sources, quotes or testimonies to back that claim up, instead simply basically saying "it's true because we said it is." An unofficial breed club that provides no sources to back itself up is in no way a neutral source, nor is it reliable (in that it references only itself regarding Sergeant Stubby's breed). However, a neutral, historic source in the New York Times from Sergeant Stubby's lifetime (about being awarded a gold medal by General Pershing), states that Sergeant Stubby was a Boston bull terrier. A historic, neutral source regarding his breed is going to be more reliable than a breed club that, again, practically says "it's true because we said it is." Please correct this issue or find a neutral, unbiased source to confirm the claim that Sergeant Stubby was a pit bull terrier. Thank you for your time. 174.71.119.74 (talk) 22:52, 17 June 2012 (UTC)


 * I just changed the section to say he was "allegedly an American Staffordshire Terrier" just until we have some more sources to verify his breed. To be honest though, as he was a stray, I think the best we'll ever get is hearsay. Kjath (talk) 03:31, 19 June 2012 (UTC)


 * Kjath, I'd like to see the source for that allegation. Wikipedia requires sources for verification, not people's opinions. Biased sources that have something to gain from making those things up and who provide no references to verify their claims, such the breed clubs that say "Sergeant Stubby was an American Staffordshire Terrier and you'd better believe it because we just said it" are not neutral, nor are they reliable. They are misleading. I wouldn't trust any breed club to guess a dog's breed unless they provide concrete sources and proof. Not a Chihuahua club, not a German Shepherd club, not a Poodle club, not an anything club, unless they can definitively prove it. I come to Wikipedia for the truth, not guesses.
 * To be fair and truthful, I propose that it should be changed back to "he was of unknown breed," as, in your own words, "...as he was a stray, I think the best we'll ever get is hearsay." See, you basically stated yourself that anything besides "unknown breed" is just a guess, and guesses have no place on Wikipedia. 174.71.119.74 (talk) 04:09, 19 June 2012 (UTC)


 * I completely agree. I just worded it as such because technically it has been alleged -- by the Staffordshire Bull Terrier Club. I don't mind changing it to stating that his breed was unknown until we can find some sources. Personally I think he looks like a Staffordshire mix, and seeing as how he was a stray -- this is very likely. My opinion however, is just as good as hearsay. I'll check for sources in the meantime. Kjath (talk) 04:12, 21 June 2012 (UTC)


 * What about when it was alleged by the New York Times that he was a Boston bull terrier? Does that get a place in here, or do we just want readers to see one side of the story? Also, as Stafforshire/pit bull owners claim, "a Staffie/pit bull can never be identified" ...unless it's a hero? Neither you nor I can do original research on him, and pictures are in no way a reliable source. We need neutral, reliable sources - not a breed club or somebody's opinion or guesses. Until then, it needs to be changed back to "unknown breed," and we must make sure that all future editors read the talk page before entering another crude misspelling of "pit bull" (e.g. "pittbull"). 174.71.119.74 (talk) 05:12, 21 June 2012 (UTC)


 * As I said in the above, I've owned both Boston Terriers and Staffordshire Bull Terriers, I can assure you Stubby was a Boston, not a Staffordshire. The early Bostons were all brindle colored, like Stubby, and Stubby's physique resembles the leaner physique of a Boston over a Staffordshire. But since there is no reliable documentation either way, I have edited the article to simply say he is breed indeterminate. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2001:4898:0:FFF:0:5EFE:A50:5A6F (talk) 23:37, 31 July 2012 (UTC)

much of stubby is legend
You actually think a dog was promoted to sergeant?

Wvguy8258 (talk) 05:26, 26 June 2012 (UTC)

I find this article's assertions to be dubious at best. --Pathogen1014 (talk) 02:33, 21 September 2012 (UTC)

Stubby was of unknown breed!
I find it amazing that when a pit bull or pit bull mix is in the news for attacks advocates scream that it is not a pit bull or demand a DNA test yet from these vintage pictures they claim stubby is a pit bull and use him as propaganda for their cause. Stubby was NOT a pit bull and in all writings and history of stubby it says he was of unknown breed. Never does it say he was any pit bull or pit bull mix. I think this article has been vandalized long enough with this nonsense and it is nothing but people trying to push a political agenda by labeling him a pit bull. Plus if an identical looking dog was involved in the news in a negative manner the pit advocates would be the first to claim he looks nothing like a pit bull. To this point, anyone with basic knowledge of dog breeds can see this does not look like a modern or even vintage pit bull. It looks more like a Boston bull mix then anything but it is useless to speculate because he was a mutt of UNKNOWN breed!

Sergeant claim & decorations
I removed this as it is apparently a folk legend and it was immediately replaced without a source. In fact it's been explained as a folk legend and I've added that to the article. Early sources used don't mention it, eg this 1921 source. Nor does the Connecticut Military Deparment. Nor does this. Dougweller (talk) 14:47, 11 July 2014 (UTC)
 * The same source I used in the article also says "This theory about the absence of a duplicate set of medals calls into question one of the central threads of Stubby lore: that he personally had earned all that recognition. In truth, with a few exceptions—such as the German Iron Cross and the Joanne d’Arc medallion presented while the pair was stationed near Ncufchatcau—Stubby probably had not. Early on, the people around them likely understood this distinction. As the dogs fame began to grow, this technicality faded in importance. When his medal-heavy jacket drew more and more comment, Conroy would have had no reason to parse the details with news reporters and other admirers. To him. Stubby really had helped earn those medals, so there was no duplicity in letting his friend quite literally bear the rewards. Thus, over time, implications—such as Stubby having been personally decorated by the French government—grew into “facts.”
 * "Stubby’s U.S. military insignia are a different matter, though. From the beginning, the mascot’s jacket sported YD patches on its “shoulders." After the war his coat gained a wound stripe and three gold service chevrons, too. (Each of the fabric chevrons represented six months of overseas service.) These badges were sewn onto the “sleeve" area of the jacket, in keeping with Army protocol—the right sleeve for the wound stripe and the left sleeve for the service chevrons. Conroy’s uniform would have displayed all these required trimmings, too, so he would have had to acquire a special set for his friend to keep the dog’s jacket up to date and official. It’s easy to imagine that Conroy, especially as a member of the regimental headquarters company, would have had no difficulty obtaining such emblems." p 134 Dougweller (talk) 16:48, 11 July 2014 (UTC)

The US government does not give medals to animals
See, and. Stubby's decorations were given to him by others, eg Conroy. We shouldn't be suggesting they were official. Dougweller (talk) 16:50, 13 July 2014 (UTC)

Not the first American war dog
This is also wrong and a bit of an insult to earlier war dogs. See Dogs in warfare. The Army used dogs in the Seminole Wars and the Civil War. Dougweller (talk) 14:52, 13 July 2014 (UTC)

article name
Would it be contentious to suggest that this article could be at Stubby (dog)? Most of the sources just give his name as "Stubby" GraemeLeggett (talk) 15:47, 13 July 2014 (UTC)
 * I'd support that. It certainly matches the earlier sources, including the New York Times obituary. Dougweller (talk) 20:40, 13 July 2014 (UTC)
 * Support Among the sources in our article, the sobriquet "Sergeant Stubby" is relatively rare and recent. Lead sentence and paragraph should keep it, however, as some people call him that. I agree that a redirect should include the name. 7&amp;6=thirteen (☎) 20:59, 14 July 2014 (UTC)


 * Of course, we would say "also known as Sergeant Stubby" and keep that as a redirect to the renamed article. Dougweller (talk) 08:43, 15 July 2014 (UTC)

Smithsonian page
I'm told by a curator there that it is likely to be changed to reflect some of Ann Bausum's research. Dougweller (talk) 13:19, 15 July 2014 (UTC)

Date of death
regarding this change: oldid=530260139


 * http://uswardogsmemorial.org/id16.html says April, 4th
 * an article printed by the "New York Times", 4 April 1926 says, that Stubby is dead. Is it really likely that there are these news the same day he actually passed away?

Isn't "March 16th 1926" more likely? --PigeonIP (talk) 12:01, 29 July 2014 (UTC)
 * historylearningsite.co.uk,


 * Ann Bausum's book (which a Smithsonian curator told me was very good) says March 16th on page 220. So we can source it. Dougweller (talk) 12:44, 29 July 2014 (UTC)

Sergeant Stubby's hearing
Since artillery shells arrive moving faster than the speed of sound, as illustrated in the movie "All's Quiet on the Western Front", neither the sergeant nor any other being could have heard them coming. That part at least is certainly a myth. It is possible (but unlikely) that the sergeant could have seen them coming, and that tends to happen most often when the shell is headed your way. Ealtram (talk) 15:14, 9 July 2016 (UTC)

Length of Stubby's combat service
In the section entitled Military Service, the article states that he "served with the 102nd Infantry Regiment in the trenches in France for 18 months." The 26th Infantry Division did not reach France until September 1917 and was in training until January 1918. The armistice was signed in November 1918, and while it's true that the division wasn't demobilized until May 1919, it is a bit of a stretch to say that Stubby was "in the trenches" for 18 months. Eskiprof (talk) 14:28, 4 October 2017 (UTC)

Recent edits
Regarding the text "American bull terrier" linking to the Wikipedia page for bull-and-terrier, the Wikipedia page in question does not mention American bull terrier as a name for bull-and-terrier so I'm wondering what the source is for that claim. The Ann Bausum source lists American bull terrier as a synonym for early Boston terriers, and in fact this is mentioned in the very same paragraph. I think the link to bull-and-terrier should either be properly sourced or removed. To clarify, I'm not proposing the removal of the text itself or mention of American bull terrier since it's been established that he was called that (again, like the early Boston terriers were), just the dubious linking to bull-and-terrier without a proper source. Perhaps that section could be cleaned up a bit to clarify that Stubby was a mixed breed dog but that (per Ann Bausum) he was likely part Boston terrier. Glitchhiker (talk) 19:43, 19 September 2019 (UTC)
 * Bull and terrier seemed preferable to Bull terrier; it's pretty clear from photos that Stubby was not anything like what's currently known as a Bull terrier. We're probably not going to find a source that uses the phrase "bull and terrier," it's just that's what seemed to be the closest Wikipedia article we have to the concept of dogs descended from a particular lineage. I'm certainly open to a better link if you can find one. OhNo itsJamie  Talk 21:50, 19 September 2019 (UTC)

I agree that bull terrier is an incorrect link, but the very next sentence (which is well-sourced) establishes that American bull terrier (which is what he was called in some sources) was a synonym for the first Boston terriers. Wikipedia isn't the best place for speculation, at least not outside of talk pages. Even Boston terrier is a better link than bull and terrier given the Ann Bausum source.

In addition, here's an AKC link establishing that the original name for the Boston terrier was American bull terrier: https://www.akc.org/dog-breeds/boston-terrier/ "In the year 1889, fanciers formed the American Bull Terrier Club (the former name of Boston Terriers), but upon meeting opposition from both Bulldog and Bull Terrier fanciers, changed the name in 1891." I propose we unlink bull and terrier and add a note that American bull terrier is what Boston terriers were once called since there is written history of that. Glitchhiker (talk) 01:17, 21 September 2019 (UTC)
 * That's fine with me, as long as the text makes it clear that his breed wasn't definitely known, and that multiple sources use the word "mutt," implying a mixed breed. OhNo itsJamie Talk 01:35, 21 September 2019 (UTC)

Archive Link Broken
The link to https://web.archive.org/web/20140624031648/http://amhistory.si.edu/militaryhistory/exhibition/flash.html?path=8.1.r_15 is broken. That page on the Archive displays a loading page which never loads. (It is currently at reference #6.) As such, that information can't be accessed. What should be done about that? 1.126.106.17 (talk) 13:30, 8 September 2023 (UTC)