Talk:Yorkshire Terrier/Archive 1

"Gabby" yorkie photo removed
The latest yorkie photo is a much better example of the breed and is a clearer photo as well. The Gabby photo is no longer needed on this page. An anon user keeps putting it back, apparently feeling that this is his/her own private page. However, it's not, it's an encyclopedia. I hope that he/she will stop doing this. Elf | Talk 22:14, 20 September 2005 (UTC)


 * Can you please explain why you think gabby is a better photo? I don't see it and neither do the other editors of this page. The dog breed pages never have 2 photos in the photo box at the top. I have moved that and another photo to a gallery at the end of the article, which we're doing with several articles now. Elf | Talk 05:41, 21 September 2005 (UTC)

Photo dispute
This article is now protected. Please work out your differences on the talk page instead of edit warring. · Katefan0(scribble) 19:55, 20 October 2005 (UTC)

Temperament section
The "Temperament" section of this article is blatently not neutral It lavishes the dog with praise while giving only a very carefully nuanced and indirect admission of its yappiness. This is an encyclopedia. Just lay out the facts.There seems to be too much fluffly language in this article. I didn't want to hurt anyone's feelings (or waste my time) by trying to glean it all out, but I thought it should at least be mentioned. (Examples: "pack a surprisingly powerful...", "canine cousins")go to dogster to learn about this breed[[Media:dogster .com]]

Also, did anyone notice that the final paragraph of the Temperament section seems to be defending the intelligence of the breed?

There are several clauses such as, "like all dogs" and "as with many purebred dogs". These seem to warrant the removal of the statements that they modify. If such characteristics are not specific to the breed, why should they be specially noted in an article about the breed?

Finally, I don't think it's bad enough to be nominated for a dispute, but this article certainly seems to lack objectivity. Much has been contributed with little or no regard for neutrality, clarity, or verifiability. Apparently, some contributors have been so eager to discuss the topic, that the contribution guidelines were laid aside. --Jack 17:03, 27 April 2006 (UTC)


 * There is a proposal that Temperament sections in the dog breed articles be eliminated as they usually contain very similar vague and unreferenced platitudes. Please comment on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Dogs

-

Re "show dog" link that currently doesn't link to anything--it will eventually; there are quite a few pages that link to it so it's useful to have links-in-waiting. Elf | Talk 04:50, 15 Jun 2004 (UTC)

-

GuloGuloGulo, can you please explain why you changed "... fondly known as Yorkie" to "... also known"? "Yorkie" is a "pet" term, a sort of slang that is used to fondly refer to these dogs. It is not a name that stands on an equal footing with the full "Yorkshire Terrier" (at least as used by people I know). Nyh


 * I'm not the one who changed it, but I can tell you that "fondly" implies an emotional interpretation of why someone would call the dog that name, but since this is an an encyclopedia in which NPOV is important, it tries to report the facts (the dog *is* called a Yorkie, but what emotional state someone *might* be in when doing so is speculation).

Can someone please include some information in the Yorkshire Terrier article about the Trachea problem that can occur in this breed? I learned a year or so ago about this problem which can and does occur with this particular breed (and certain other breeds of small dogs) and many Yorkshire Terrier owners don't know about this issue. The Trachea can collapse in some of the dogs in this breed and when it does there's little or nothing that can be done about it, leaving the affected dog to be put to sleep. I've heard this problem may be genetic, but it can also be brought about by tugging at tight collars around the neck, as such collars shouldn't be used on these dogs but instead a halter to avoid pressure on the neck. I would include some information in the wikipedia article on Yorkshire Terrier about this myself, but at the moment I don't have the exact info about this in front of me so I'm hoping someone else will include the information. I've found this Trachea collapse medical problem mentioned in books on the breed and on various personal websites on-line. --Demonslave 15:45, Sep 21, 2004 (UTC)


 * I'm afraid those are the same sources that most of us would have available for adding that info. Would have to go find the appropriate books or web sites and write up what appears to be fact or commonly accepted wisdom in our own words. Which means you're as qualified as most people to do it.  Be bold!  Elf | Talk 16:06, 21 Sep 2004 (UTC)


 * Thanks, Elf, I'll try to get back to this page sometime in the near future and add this important bit of information. I appreciate your quick response to my comment. --Demonslave 16:47, Sep 21, 2004 (UTC)

-

--- Regis, 2005/9/11

Photo vote
or Which photo should be the main breed photo in the breed box, Photo1 or Photo 2? (Notes as to why or suggestions on changes would be helpful.)  Compare to this image of a yorkie from the westminster kennel club


 * Photo 1. Looks more like typical Yorkie. Clearer photo, can see fur and eyes more clearly, more reflections in Photo 2. Elf | Talk 16:35, 22 September 2005 (UTC)
 * Photo 1 Clearer photo with more detail. photo 2 would at least need cropping before me voting for it is even considered! (posted by Tekana)
 * Photo 1 While I don't think either is the best representation of a Yorkie, I do think #1 is the best of the two. Maltmomma  (chat)  [[Image:Flag_of_Texas.svg|18px]] 20:04, 22 September 2005 (UTC)
 * Photo 1 is a more typical Yorkie and a better photo. Dsurber 22:08, 22 September 2005 (UTC)
 * Photo 2 is a much better representation of a Yorkshire Terrier and much more suitable for an encyclopedia. The Wikipedia contributor who suggested that posting it constituted "vandalism" is, it seems to me, being unreasonable. 68.99.130.81 03:16, 23 September 2005 (UTC)
 * Photo 1 i don't really like either photo, but #1 is a much better photo, it is more typical of the breed standard. The "gabby" photo's coat appears coarse in places and is too short to be a breed example (this could be a result of grooming), the blue on #2 is a silvery blue rather than a dark blue, the dog almost appears to be one color unless you know what you are looking for, the dog's hind legs appear somewhat splayed, the top of the skull is way too rounded.   The #1 (Nika) photo is not without problems, lopped ear and mixture of blue with the tan on the top of head and face, the entire photo appears appears too dark.   In the end, compare to dog show champion photo. #1 looks a lot more like the example than photo #2. - Trysha (talk) 19:07, 4 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Photo 2 why do you refer to #1 as a "Jorkshire Terrier"? I have never heard of such a thing. Also, #1 has one ear up and one down. A show quality Yorkshire Terrier would have both ears up. #2 was posted first so put her back. - PupsAZ/63.73.199.69 16:39, 4 October 2005 (UTC)


 * The filename doesn't really matter, although "j" can be pronounced like a "y" in some cases (like Jarlsberg cheese), so the photo's uploader could have been trying to be silly with the filename. Trysha (talk) 19:07, 4 October 2005 (UTC)


 * For someone who is so concerned about a posting a picture that best represents a Yorkshire terrier, you'd think they'd at least pay attention enough and spell it right.
 * The original uploader of that picture is a user named RegisCartoons.  At that this user has done is upload that picture and a picture of shrek.   One can only assume that they weren't so concerned about anything except helping out.  That user has not commented here at all and has no agenda.       I think that you seem overly angry whole gabby picture thing.  You shouldn't take this personally.  Part of the spirit of wikipedia is people working together to make the best information possible available.   If someone reverts your changes, you should discuss it with them - that's the first step. Not undoing the changes - that will just make people mad at you.     Be Bold does not mean come here and repeately revert a photo when everyone disagrees with you.   That's just getting mad and stomping your foot.   It will turn people against you.   If people disagree with you, accept it and move on to something else.  Find a better photo, or maybe research some information about yorkies and improve the info the page?    Is it your dog? I can only assume that this is your dog (and that User:PupsAZ / User::Arizonaland are you) so how about taking a better picture of the dog, maybe one outdoors, eye level to the dog, with her looking over your shoulder at a slight angle so that people can get a side view in a natural environment.   There are a lot of things that you can do to help out make things better. (and maybe people will disagree with me about what makes a good dog photo, and that's OK, we'll discuss it and come to a consensus!)   - Trysha (talk) 22:04, 4 October 2005 (UTC)

I don't know who Arizonaland is and I don't appreciate you acting like I am in a conspiracy with them. I was responding to a poll that someone put up who has WAY TOO MUCH time on their hands. As do you for that long reply. Gabbie is cuter and that's all. My yorkshire terrier just passed away and I was just viewing the page. Ok?? As you said, this a discussion and I should be free to say what I want without you making implications!!--63.73.199.69 15:04, 6 October 2005 (UTC)


 * I (and im sure everybody else here) is sorry for your loss but i am afraid that does not entitle you to to make random insults at people here. Im sure that if you were to re-read Trysha's post you would see that what she stated was an assumption not an accusation and that it is not something that you should feel offended about.


 * Also, I feel you need to read through the policies and guidelines as i am afraid that a picture does not get entitled to be in the breed box simply because "it was there first" or is just "cuter" than the other one. Wikipedians work together to try and make the wikipedia the best encyclopedia possible, not the cutest. Is this something that you simply dont understand, or are choosing to ignore?


 * Besides, it is not like the gabby photo had been completely exiled from the page, if you would care to scroll down you would see that it is still there! You must realise that just because a photo is not in the breed box, does not make it inferior or overlooked, people looking at the page will pay as much attention to that as the one at the top of the page! Tekana (O.o) Talk 15:42, 6 October 2005 (UTC)

You asked for a vote and my comments and that's what was posted. I did not "make random insults at people here", nor did I say anything about what I felt should be the "guidelines" for posting a picture, etc. The person asked for a vote and and to place my comments and that is what I did. I felt that the statement "I can only assume that this is your dog (and that User:PupsAZ / User::Arizonaland are you)" was insulting and I am sorry if you don't feel that way. My understanding is that this is a "discussion" board?--63.73.199.69 19:02, 6 October 2005 (UTC)


 * Photo 1 is a better representation of the breed. A few have commented on one of its ears being down, but their ears tend to flop down when nervous or anxious or sick. In photo 2, the dog's ears are too big which would not be acceptable in a show, the coat isn't full enough, and the muzzle is a bit too big. Check the breed standards.-24.10.48.173 00:45, 23 May 2006 (UTC)

Photo request
I've added the photo request template and let me explain in detail. The main reason I added the request is because a don't think that any of the current photos do justice to this gorgeous breed. Second, there are no photos of a Yorkie in show coat, which would probably be preferable for the infobox. And third, there are no good photos of a Yorkie standing, which I feel is the best way to show the conformation. Pharaoh Hound 19:42, 4 July 2006 (UTC)

"Gabby" photo (yet again)
Once again, the infamous "Gabby" photo has ended up in the infobox. Since the disision of the vote was the first photo, I am putting it back in the infobox. (this is getting sorta ridiculus) Pharaoh Hound 00:19, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

Additions to Famous Yorkies
I recently added entries for Toto (of the book version of The Wonderful Wizard of Oz), and for Mignon, featured as the family dog on the US television series Green Acres. The entry for Toto is not totally verifiable, as many feel the illustration in Baum's original 1900 edition is that of a Yorkie; however, no specific mention of Toto's breed is known to exist. This is noted in the entry.

Also, I have a copy of William Wynne's book, Yorkie Doodle Dandy; should anyone feel that this entry needs reference, I'd be happy to edit this section in a way that ensures verifiability. --BuzzDog 19:14, 30 July 2006 (UTC)

Biewer Reference in Miscellaneous Section
The entry contains a biased statement, "As the Biewer develops, it should not be crossed back to the Yorkie." May I suggest that this be revised to read,

"It has been noted that many breeders hold the opinion that, as the Biewer breed develops, it should no longer be bred (known as backcrossing) with the Yorkshire Terrier.",

as this better represents this statement as an opinion, rather than as a fact? --BuzzDog 19:14, 30 July 2006 (UTC)

Dogs that appear sullen or life-less are to be penalized
penalized? heh heh..

ti 04:05, 25 October 2006 (UTC)
 * My bad. I've fixed it like this "Dogs that appear sullen or life-less are penalized in dog shows"

There was a link here to a Yorkshire Terrier Society which including some other breeds as well - the link went back to a commerical breeding establishment! Please watch the Yorkie pages carefully as this is a prime puppymill breed and there will be plenty of online breeders who would love to capitlize on this webpage!

Image req
Images have been provided for this article, therefore the tag was removed. VanTucky 21:29, 2 May 2007 (UTC)


 * The current primary image [[Image:JorkshireNamedNika.png|right|120px]] (as shown on the right) is not very indicative of the breed. Not only does it have a unusual colouring on its underside, but it is "dressed up" with a ribbon. A different image would be preferable. Canderra 16:25, 16 May 2007 (UTC)


 * I agree. |The selection from Commons is rather sparse however. Here are a few options I think fit the bill...

this one still has a ribbon to clear the face, but I think it's a bit better.

what do you think? VanTucky 19:20, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

I agree with the image you replaced in the infobox. I also added one more pet standard image of a Yorkie, as the size of the article merits it and it is good to have a balance (two show dogs, two pets - one showing a young dog). VanTucky 19:42, 16 May 2007 (UTC)


 * I believe I have added an image that solves the problem. It's a Am. Ch. show Yorkie stacked. -- Pharaoh Hound  (talk)   (The Game)  19:45, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

Citation number 6?
What's wrong with citation number 6? It's cited as a reference for no fewer than 30 of article's assertions, and yet when I go to it at the bottom it's just blank. Where did all of that stuff come from? TobyTheRobot 15:45, 20 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Fixed it. It got messed up by an edit about three and one-half weeks ago. --Joelmills 03:32, 21 June 2007 (UTC)

I made an edit to the breed history. Careful not to refer to the Broken Haired Scotch terrier as a "Scottie" or a "Scottish Terrier." A Scottie is a completely seperate breed that has absolutly no connection to the Yorkshire Terrier.

Parti-colored Yorkshire Terriers
I found on the web today several sites selling AKC Parti-colored Yorkshire Terriers.. Is this a true color variation in this breed? I noticed it wasn't mentioned at all in the article about this color variant existing and was curious about it.. Aparently AKC allows it to be registered as a Parti-colored Yorkshire Terrier from what i have read, but not sure. I have asked one of the breeders and was told that this is not the same as the Biewer.. just curious --Ltshears (talk) 16:15, 8 March 2009 (UTC)
 * In Europe, unlike in the US, in many countries there are very stringent standards for breeding and for accepting a dog for registration. Mr. Biewer was tweaked that the German Kennel Club wouldn't register his dogs, so he started a new breed. That was 20 or 30 years ago, and it is definitely a breed now, even though it came from the Yorkshire Terrier, was crossed until recently with the Yorkshire Terrier, and looks like a Yorkshire Terrier. For a similar situation with the Yorkshire in the early 1900s, see the article on the Australian Silky Terrier. So breeds are created!
 * Mismarks and parti-colours are common in all breeds, but the Yorkshire Terrier fanciers have been very careful about keeping the breed's defining blue and tan colours true, and discouraging breeding of partis. For the AKC, "Any solid color or combination of colors other than blue and tan" and "any white markings other than a small white spot on the forechest that does not exceed 1 inch at its longest dimension" are disqualifications, which essentially means that the owners are to be discouraged from breeding off-coloured dogs (although they can be registered and entered in dog sports other than conformation showing - Agility Yorkies?) The United Kennel Club defines the breed as blue and tan as well, although it does not disqualify parti-poodles, and allows them to be shown in a separate class. However, in the US there is a vast novelty pet market, and if partis show up in a litter, breeders can sell them as something "rare" or special! With the internet, pet owners and large commercial breeders can breed anything any way they want, call it anything they want, and somewhere there will be a kennel club that will register it. Does that mean that a parti Yorkshire Terrier or one with a wooly coat then actually represents a nice Yorkshire terrier because it is registered with the xyz kc and is called "rare"? I don't think any of the serious fanciers would agree with that. And it wouldn't be Biewer, either :-)--Hafwyn (talk) 16:43, 9 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Thank you for clearing that up.. i was just curious as it was the first time i have ever even heard of a parti colored yorkshire terrier.. --Ltshears (talk) 17:39, 9 March 2009 (UTC)

Cleanup/restructure
There was a great deal of redundant material scattered around in different sections, as well as multiple tags that had not been addressed for about a year, and obvious vandalism along with missing material that may have been deleted during well-meaning edits. The image box data and categories have been restored, and the article given a structure more like that of the other dog project articles. This should make additional editing easier.--Hafwyn (talk) 05:22, 14 March 2009 (UTC)

Issues:
 * The two pictures of the 2 and 3 year old dog add nothing to the article; they should be put in the commons category if they are not already there, and taken out of the article.
 * The Temperament section could be deleted since it adds nothing, is redundant, and is basically unreferenced. (There is a proposal that Temperament sections in the dog breed articles be eliminated as they usually contain very similar vague and unreferenced platitudes. Please comment on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Dogs.)
 * The Notability section is really, really long. Can it be trimmed down some?

I removed the Temperament section, as well as another, because both were "sourced" exclusively by an Amazon page. I removed all the references to that page as well, though keeping the info which it sourced, as it didn't strike me as being spurious. I removed the film/tv/lit references in the Notability section, which trimmed it considerably. If you want to cut more, I don't think I'd mind. I maintained the pictures. I don't think it's that bad keeping them there, but if you still want them removed, go ahead. carl bunderson (talk) (contributions) 23:59, 16 March 2009 (UTC)

Commercial Websites Referenced
It is appropriate to identify commercial websites? Even though not directly hyperlinked, it seems inappropriate. 169.2.124.130 (talk) 20:55, 21 April 2009 (UTC)

i agree. i think it should be removed (86.13.201.194 (talk) 21:50, 21 April 2009 (UTC))

YORKSHIRE TERRIER
THIS DOGS ARE VERY SWEET DOGS THEIR R NICE DOGS TOO HAVE FOR A FAMILY DOG PET. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.3.254.113 (talk) 00:44, 7 May 2009 (UTC)


 * That's wonderful, now stop spamming the talk page with your comments. Thank you. Mokoniki (talk) 22:13, 17 June 2009 (UTC)Mokonikii have a yorkie and there amazing! pets to be in family's

Can we place a British English rule on this article?
I find this strange that this hasn't been mentioned before - why isn't there a British English rule on this article, the Yorkshire Terrier originates in England, that must be a valid claim for this to be written in British English. There are a number of uses of American English used in this article - the most obvious is the 'Other Colors' section. I recently reverted a edit which changed 'reconise' (correct British Spelling) to 'reconize' (correct American Spelling) - can we make this a official rule of this article, to just stop the random sentences with different variants of English. It seems perfectly reasonable. Thanks -- George 2001hi  (Discussion)   18:17, 7 September 2010 (UTC) -- George 2001hi  (Discussion)   06:43, 8 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Done. Miyagawa   (talk)  21:56, 7 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Thanks, I changed the banner to the larger one - to make it more noticeable. Thanks

Merger proposal
Chocolate Yorkshire Terrier should be merged into this page (Yorkshire Terrier). It doesn't make a lot of sense to have separate articles for each color that occurs in each breed. What next, "Merle Border Collie"? "Blue Newfoundland"? Not reasonable. Articles on those colors/patterns in general are fine, but this is a classic case where merging would be more appropriate. Anna talk 04:45, 6 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Alright, I agree. Will do. Though I'm a bit worried about how it will be received, as its very controversial. I think this is why someone made a page for it. I just hope people are willing to set aside their differences, remember this is wikipedia, and remember to keep a neutral view... ItsWolfeh (talk) 05:32, 6 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Well, I'm not sure how controversial just merging it would be. After all, it already lists a slew of other less-preferred colors in this article, and I haven't seen anyone complain about that. Anna talk 05:52, 6 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Ah, I see you've gone ahead with the merger -- I've done a bit of cleanup/integration and redirected chocolate Yorkshire Terrier to this page. Hope that's okay! Anna talk 06:01, 6 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Yes that is okay. Thank you! ItsWolfeh (talk) 06:06, 6 July 2011 (UTC)

This article uses British spelling conventions
I just changed every occurrence of color to colour. The reason was purely arithmetic in nature; there were some 19 instances of colour vs about 8 instances of color so the British version won per WP:CONSISTENCY. The argument that Yorkies are a British breed and therefore British spelling automatically applies is not compelling; the breed is international and not strongly enough associated with British culture to meet that standard. However, the number of British spellings of colour outnumbered the American so it wins by that criterion. I did not analyze the article for other American/British spelling conflicts and it's possible that if they were all taken into consideration then the American spelling would prove more numerous. If anyone wants to volunteer to do this analysis then be my guest; I personally think we should just pick a variety of English for this page and then stick with it. Also, when changing color to colour, please note that:
 * 1) I did not change the spelling of color if it appeared in the title of a reference or as part of a quote.
 * 2) I did not change the spelling of particolor because I do not know if there is a British alternative spelling. I will let some other editor make a contribution in that regard if need be.

Ps. I just noticed that this talk page has a British English banner so I guess that means it's sorted, we're using British.

Cheers and peace to all, Dusty |&#x1f4ac;|You can help! 13:40, 29 April 2013 (UTC)

Size and Weight as defining features of the Breed
As stated in the wikipage: The defining features of the breed are its maximum size of 7 pounds (3.2 kg), and it cites the American Kennel Club which is a breeding and showmanship club.

To say that the Yorkshire Terrier has a maximum size of 3.5kg and use that as a "defining feature" is completely inaccurate since it is not uncommon to find completely fit pure breed Yorkies with up to 7kg (15+lbs), and honestly just because they are over the "American Kennel Club" standards it does not mean they are not Yorkies.

I suggest that this section needs clarification in a way that it says the "maximum size" of 3.2kg is the size most breeders expect from a Yorkie that is used for breeding and dog shows, but not the actual maximum size of the breed as a whole, in the same way that 80kg for example is not the maximum size for a perfectly fit human.

I've seen too many dogs abandoned by their owners just because they did not meet the expected breed standards and wikipedia should strive to be fully accurate in its content, specially in subjects that may have a positive/negative impact in the real world. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.90.178.226 (talk) 22:31, 4 June 2014 (UTC)

Lead picture
One can't put a picture of a dog with only showing front, head - in the lead. And the picture is not sharp. Not when better pictures are on Commons. And a big red red Bingo on it. That is not possible - not allowed. Hafspajen (talk) 08:14, 29 August 2014 (UTC)

Pic
This picture was in the article before, meaning to illustrate how owners put close on dogs. It is sharp and quite good. Can it be added? Otherwise might be added at Dog clothing  or something. Hafspajen (talk) 15:06, 20 September 2014 (UTC)

Another Pic
I replaced the photo under Health as you could not see any features on the previous photo. It was claimed that the photo did not add anything-yet it illustrates a healthy seven year old Yorkshire arguably at mid life. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Zj007ny (talk • contribs) 15:20, 20 September 2014 (UTC)
 * Well, I have to agree that this article is in need of better pictures. For the moment your picture you added here is already in three other articles, so I would try to stay satisfiead with that one, not many pictures are used so much. If I would be you, I would try to take a new picture as I explained on your talk. This one is a little out of focus. Hafspajen (talk) 15:53, 20 September 2014 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 1 one external link on Yorkshire Terrier. Please take a moment to review my edit. You may add after the link to keep me from modifying it, if I keep adding bad data, but formatting bugs should be reported instead. Alternatively, you can add to keep me off the page altogether, but should be used as a last resort. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20090311041558/http://www.ukcdogs.com:80/WebSite.nsf/Breeds/YorkshireTerrier to http://www.ukcdogs.com/WebSite.nsf/Breeds/YorkshireTerrier

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

Cheers.—cyberbot II  Talk to my owner :Online 06:50, 31 March 2016 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 8 one external links on Yorkshire Terrier. 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/20070211152201/http://www.thekennelclub.org.uk:80/item/199 to http://www.thekennelclub.org.uk/item/199
 * Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20090318222408/http://www.ytca.org:80/faq.html to http://www.ytca.org/faq.html#B
 * Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20090318222408/http://www.ytca.org:80/faq.html to http://www.ytca.org/faq.html#B
 * Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20090318222408/http://www.ytca.org:80/faq.html to http://www.ytca.org/faq.html#C
 * Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20090328030803/http://www.ytca.org:80/mainview.htm to http://www.ytca.org/mainview.htm
 * Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20120329215719/http://www.ankc.org.au/Breed_Details.aspx?bid=43 to http://www.ankc.org.au/Breed_Details.aspx?bid=43
 * Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20070211152201/http://www.thekennelclub.org.uk:80/item/199 to http://www.thekennelclub.org.uk/item/199
 * Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20040615234638/http://www.nzkc.org.nz:80/br164.html to http://www.nzkc.org.nz/br164.html

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

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 17:14, 16 July 2016 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 one external links on Yorkshire Terrier. 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/20070221132319/http://www.vet.ksu.edu:80/studentorgs/Therio/pdf/Hereditary_Congenital.pdf to http://www.vet.ksu.edu/studentorgs/Therio/pdf/Hereditary_Congenital.pdf
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20041230234816/http://www.petfinder.com/journalindex.cgi?path=/public/breeds/dogbreeds/1.4.28.txt&template=templateprint.html to http://www.petfinder.com/journalindex.cgi?path=/public/breeds/dogbreeds/1.4.28.txt&template=templateprint.html
 * Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20150211131100/http://www.ufaw.org.uk/PORTOSYSTEMICSHUNTYORKSHIRETERRIER.php to http://www.ufaw.org.uk/PORTOSYSTEMICSHUNTYORKSHIRETERRIER.php
 * Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20120831162939/http://www.fci.be:80/uploaded_files/086gb2009_en.doc to http://www.fci.be/uploaded_files/086gb2009_en.doc

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

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 22:51, 20 July 2016 (UTC)

Biewer Terrier
According to the American Kennel Club, the Biewer Terrier is a separate breed (the AKC includes it in its Foundation Stock Service group). Biewer Terrier is also recognized as a separate breed in Russia and Brazil. --Canarian (talk) 17:20, 28 October 2016 (UTC)

Biewer Terrier
AS you will see at the top of this page the Afd for Biewer Terrier was closed as merge to Yorkshire Terrier. Does anyone here want to handle it. I can have a look at this tomorrow. Jezhotwells (talk) 22:29, 20 December 2009 (UTC)
 * I have examined the AfD'd article and there was little encyclopaedic material that could be added, but I added a small detail about the original breeders. Jezhotwells (talk) 18:29, 21 December 2009 (UTC)

I removed the following parenthetical statement about Biewer Terrier's

"(note that this breed is not eligible for registration in Germany, its country of origin. Until it is, no official club, world-wide will recognize the Biewer as being purebred)"

This is clearly outdated because the AKC has the dog in the Foundation Stock Service and apparently the kennel clubs from Brazil, South Africa and the Bahamas also have it at some stage of recognition. Jemmaca (talk) 07:02, 6 December 2014 (UTC)


 * Origin of Biewer and Parti-Color Yorkshire Terrier.png: Origin of Biewer and Parti-Color Yorkshire Terrier]]

The RFC representing Russia in the FCI recognizes the Biewer Terrier too. Here is a table where you see the ancestors of today's Biewer and Parti Colored Yorkies who were carrieres of the recessive Piebald-Gene. There is one common ancestor of both "Streamglen Shaun" who had small white spots but still became a champion. Photo: Geo-Science-International (talk) 08:34, 16 June 2016 (UTC) Geo-Science-International (talk) 17:04, 10 November 2016 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion: Participate in the deletion discussion at the. —Community Tech bot (talk) 19:37, 22 August 2019 (UTC)
 * (2 version) Grupp 3, YORKSHIRETERRIER, NO UCH SE UCH Oxzar Amazing Bel’s Toffy (24310212305).jpg


 * The photo was kept. This beautiful pure bred Yorkie champion has a white paw and some white fur in the back. I don't want to insist on the breed standard here because this is a very good photo. This dog might be a genetic carrier of the recessive Piebald gene sP. If mated with another carrier with line-breeding in a litter averagely one of four puppies can be homozygous, which means they would be Biewer-Yorkies. This is what happened to Mr. und Mrs. Biewer in Germany. Sciencia58 (talk) 06:23, 24 September 2019 (UTC)

Definition of the breed
Every dog breed is defined by all criteria mentioned in the standard. In the paragraph other colors we have the sentence: "The breed is defined by its colour, ..." This sentence is a quotation not from the standard but from an exaggeratedly formulated personal opinion. If the breed were defined only by the coat colour, a German Shepherd would also fit well into this definition (apart from the melanistic mask, which Yorkies should not have). I'd suggest, we rephrase that. For example: The standard prescribes clearly defined fur-colors, and non-standard colors may ...

Sciencia58 (talk) 11:30, 23 September 2019 (UTC)

The allele on the B-Locus determines whether a dog produces chocolate brown or black eumelanin. If the dog has the allele B (BB or Bb) he produces black eumelanin. Only if the dog has the recessive allele b homozygous (bb) he produces chocolate brown eumelanin. For example the rough-haired dachshund can be black and tan or choco and tan. The coat colour gene B or b doesn't have any influence on the health. They are all healthy dogs. Why should anyone doubt the health of a Yorkie in choco and tan? Yorkie breeders without knowledge about dog coat colour genetics sometimes assume it was a mutation, but it isn't. It is the unexpected appearance of a homozygous dog, genotype bb, born from two genetic carriers, from two parents with genotype Bb, phenotype black and tan or blue and tan, which fully correspond to the breed standard. This has nothing to do with mutation or crossbreeding with other breeds. It just occurs very rarely, because the carriers of the allele b are very rare in this breed and there is an extremely low probability that one carrier will be mated with another. So don't be worried if one or two puppies in a litter of five has a non-standard colour. If you are in the american yorkshire terrier club or in the VDH the individual will be excluded from breeding. If you're in a different umbrella organization, it won't. The same applies for the allele e for recessive red on the extension locus and the piebald-gene sP. Sciencia58 (talk) 08:06, 27 September 2019 (UTC)

"Barking scarf" listed at Redirects for discussion
A discussion is taking place to address the redirect Barking scarf. The discussion will occur at Redirects for discussion/Log/2020 May 16 until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion. TheAwesome Hwyh  00:25, 16 May 2020 (UTC)