User talk:Chendrickson2

My sources for the Morgan article are the Morgan rules. If the data is incorrect or in dispute, then do not delete a sourced entry, but rather, provide a footnote to your source and update the information that way. Or discuss it on the talk page. Please also read WP:NOT and WP:V. As for the photos, wikipedia can only use free images and we have to take what we can get. The horses in the images are identified as Morgans and appear typical of breed type. They may not be in show shape, but they aren't really all that bad. Montanabw (talk) 04:03, 13 April 2008 (UTC)


 * This is a long reply, so please do bear with me. There are several of us working on horse breed articles within WikiProject Equine, we'd all be glad to help you out.


 * Everyone likes to see articles improved, but they have to be verifiable and sourced. And particularly, when an article has been stable for a long time, anyone making dramatic changes to info that has been footnoted and referenced has the burden of producing acceptable sources for what they seek to add or change.  See Verifiability and CItation.  Also additions must have a Neutral point of view (NPOV) that doesn't sound like an advertising flyer for the registry.  For example, the Morgan breed registry standard lists a size range, it is footnoted in the article.  If you want to discuss the popularity of taller horses (seems most all breeds do), then either you need  to cite to a new rule change if there was one, or if not, then discuss the issue of how or why people (Such as Morgan Connection) think the rules should change.  Sometimes there are controversies and for the NPOV standard to be met, each side needs to get its say.  One example is the animal abuse controversies section in the rodeo article, another is the discussion of genetically-based blindness concerns in the Appaloosa article.


 * Good writing that flows with the rest of the article is a bonus, when possible. Also balance, not having undue weight on something.  (See WP:UNDUE for examples)


 * If you want to look at articles for comparison that the broader wikipedia community has designated as "Good Articles", i.e. properly written and cited, etc., look at Appaloosa and Arabian horse, as well as an article that we currently have just nominated, Thoroughbred, which may be the best yet and maybe on track (pardon the pun) to be put up for Featured Article status after it (hopefully) gets GA.


 * If you want to provide photos, they have to be free images that can be used anywhere for any reason, either public domain or GDFL licensed (which means no one can make any money off of them, basically. Info is at WP:IMAGES and on wikimedia commons on how to do this.  You may be better off to take photos yourself of your own animals and upload them directly.   Permission to be used only on wikipedia doesn't pass muster.  This becomes a huge glitch for creating wikipedia articles as many fine images cannot be used here.  A whole bunch of private photos someone added of their own horses got tossed from Spanish Jennet Horse‎ by the wikigods because the copyright wasn't acceptable.  (Most professional photographers won't release their images under a broad free use permission such as a GDFL license, let alone public domain.)


 * Oh, and see Noble Flaire, if you haven't spotted it already. Category:Morgan horses may have other related articles, not sure


 * However, as for content, if Morgans are anything like other breeds, there are always factions, and among them a huge spat between the classic foundation breeders and the hardcore show breeders. (the HYPP controversy in Quarter Horses and the "halter-type" build from Impressive bloodlines being a classic example),  If you sincerely think the Morgan used for exhibitions at the Kentucky Horse Park isn't a "typical" Morgan, then that does raise some concerns about neutrality:  I'm not a Morgan person, but I have listened to Morgan people debate the "glorified Saddlebred" versus "Justin Morgan type" for years and I know there is a dispute.  Ditto the controversies with "foundation" Quarter horse and Appaloosa breeders versus the folks breeding what's winning in the ring today.  Likewise, the "new style Arabian" is hotly debated as to whether it is an improvement  based on a century of careful breeding by American wisdom and know-how or an unridable genetic freak that has Saddlebreds in the woodpile and in the process is destroying the breed (and not exaggerating the level of debate by much!  LOL!).


 * And (grin), I'd also say it's an exaggeration to say "every other breed is accurately represented" the truth is, there are about 350 "breeds" listed at list of horse breeds and some of the articles are terrible. See, oh, hmmm... Timor Pony, and if anyone wants to take on Marwari horse, oh please do!  :-D  Montanabw (talk) 08:16, 16 April 2008 (UTC)