User talk:Montanabw

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

If people want to talk to me here, do so:

I reserve the right to edit and delete old stuff.

[edit] Fixing redirects

Thanks for fixing the redirect on the (now former) fleabitten gray article. My question is: What did I do wrong there? I tried to make it redirect but it wouldn't go...how can I do a proper job next time? There are two other stubs out there that need to be somehow incorporated into the main article...Thanks! Montanabw 20:32, 19 July 2006 (UTC)

The reason that redirect didn't work is it had a space (" ") before the "#". When there is a space at the beginning of a line on Wikipedia, the line gets put in that dotted box you may have seen and the redirect doesn't work. I see that you have been here a few months but no one has given you a welcome message with useful links, so I have put one below. If you have any questions about anything, I would be happy to help. —Centrx→talk • 20:49, 19 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Request for watchlisting processed

Hello Montanabw. Please note that I decided not to watchlist 'Horse' at Requests for investigation because the level of vandalism is easily manageable, and the article is sufficiently high-profile to be watched by many editors. If you have any questions, feel free to contact me. // [admin] Pathoschild (^talk/_map) 04:03, 28 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Horse breaking

I just did a big overhaul on one of the sections ("Secure cooperation or force submission?")--would you mind having a look and telling me what you think? Thanks :-) Tanyia 23:11, 28 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Reorganization project

I agree that Equestrianism needs some major work, but I honestly don't know where to start. I think a big part of the mess is in the western section, which, if it were broken into separate articles, would be more coherent. Unfortunately, I know very little about the Western disciplines, so I don’t feel qualified to write them. I don’t mind doing the reorganization--although no promises on when it will be finished :). If you have any possible ideas for a template for this article, I'd appreciate the help.

As for horse training and horse breaking, I don’t really feel like I know much about the different types of training methods, etc. and I’m wondering if there is a way to merge the horse breaking and horse training articles (after all, breaking is just early training). But I've never started a horse and have little first-hand knowledge in training green horses. Do you know anyone else with a better background?

However, I wrote the majority of the English saddle article and the hunt seat article, so any comments/critiques/ideas for improvement you have I’ll be happy to take care of. I know both those articles well, so it probably wouldn't take that long for me to change around as needed. Just let me know. Eventer

[edit] External links

Every article needs to be verifiable - to that end, use external links when appropriate. Non-commercial registries or databases are also suitable for inclusion, but only when used sparingly. What I believe is unsuitable are links which provide information which could be included in the article, but someone has been too lazy to do so. At the end of the day, its a judgement that someone has to make and policy can only take you so far. WP is not a link directory, and within that caveat, I say only add a link to an article if it improves the article. And forum links have absolutely no place. -- I@n 08:04, 17 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Double check image you deleted?

If you go back to the site of the image and read their licensing it says "Public Relations and Media Office is offering you different images of Slovenia that can be used for promotional purposes free of charge. You are only asked to name the photographer and the source." The copyright tag on the Commons image is incorrect. For "promotional purposes", I believe they mean promotion of Slovenia, which the article gray (horse) does not qualify. I am going to nominate the image on the Commons for deletion. -Nv8200p talk 15:00, 18 September 2006 (UTC)

The image Image:Lipizzaner PRMO.jpg is already on Wikipedia under the same name, so its deletion from Commons should have no impact. I interpret they mean for promotional purposes concerning Slovenia but I could be wrong. It is probably OK. I just believe the over use of copyrighted images is always risky -Regards Nv8200p talk 14:54, 20 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Cream gene

Hey, thanks for your work on Cream gene! I just thought that I would let you know, that if you want to change the title of an article you can use the "move" tab. We can't just cut and paste the content from one article to another, becuase the history needs to stay attatched (se we know who the authors are). I have fixed up the Cream gene move, no harm done. Happy editing :-) --Commander Keane 04:47, 20 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Photo edits

Hi! On American Quarter Horse I removed the "right" and fixed width commands because typing "thumb" automatically sizes the image and puts it on the right of the page.

For the arabian photo tag, I put it there not because all of the photos in the article need fixing, because it needs more photos, or anything like that, but because that page does need a good conformation photo. Currently that article only has paintings, a photo of a young horse, and several photos of adults that don't show the breed's conformation (the horses aren't necessarily bad examples of the breed, they just aren't photographed in a way that clearly shows the typical breed conformation). I would prefer to leave the tag up because it puts the article in Category:Wikipedia requested breed photographs. Perhaps it is difficult to find a photograph that represents the breed well, but one is needed. I am sorry if my message on the tag didn't clarify. --Pharaoh Hound (talk) 12:22, 1 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Re: Lady Wentworth

I'm one step of ahead of you, chap :-). I started it a few hours ago and will finish it soon. Thanks, Craigy (talk) 23:02, 3 October 2006 (UTC)

No problem, it's at Judith Blunt-Lytton, 16th Baroness Wentworth. Craigy (talk) 02:33, 4 October 2006 (UTC)

Well, I'm not a peerage "expert" lol, but: Lady Anne was Judith and Noel's unmarried elder daughter and Lady Winifred was their youngest daughter who married Claude Tyron. Lady Anne Blunt's (Judith's mother) title passed to Judith as most baronies from the sixteenth century and before were created to allow them to pass to female heirs if their were no male ones. This was the case with Judith who was the eldest child of Lady Anne and Wilfrid, who didn't have any sons. When Judith died, the title passed to her son, by now the Earl of Lytton, as he was their eldest child. I hope I've explained that correctly for you. Thanks Craigy (talk) 19:51, 4 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Soring

Yeah, I figured that's what was happening. I wonder what they expect to accomplish by erasing the references? They just get put right back. I don't remember why I have Tennessee Walker on my watchlist, but I'm glad I could help! --jpgordon^∇∆∇∆ 04:59, 6 October 2006 (UTC)

Gosh, I didn't see any request -- I don't often monitor RFPP. How often is this vandalism occurring? --jpgordon^∇∆∇∆ 05:16, 6 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Article on Daniel Sullivan

Hi,

In the course of fixing one small problem I discovered that we didn't have an article on Daniel Sullivan. Since the tradition of all the self-confessed "horse whisperers" seems to go back through Rarey, Powell, and then to Sullivan, it seemed an important omission. I had barely finished writing a sort of stub from memory when somebody put a tag on it challenging Sullivan as not of sufficient note to be worthy of an article.

A year or two ago I spent quite a lot of time on tracking Sullivan down. I lucked out by getting e-mail from one of Powell's descendants, else he would forever just have been a name for me. Sullivan has an even patchier record. Maybe there are contemporaneous reports of him in the British press, etc., but I haven't found much myself.

I think he is very important as the great grandfather of all the "horse whisperer" trainers in the world today, and that it would be irresponsible to fail to make available whatever we can find about such beginnings.

The article is Daniel "Horse-Whisperer" Sullivan (so titled because there is another Daniel Sullivan who already has his own article). Would you have a look at it? Maybe you can add your weight on the side of giving this pioneer his due.

Thanks. P0M 20:26, 8 October 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for your quick response. The information on Sullivan is so sparse that it took luck and persistence just to find his first name. It seems wrong that he should get no notice and yet many people who set themselves up as "the one... the only... Horsemastershipman!" would like the public to believe that they figured it all out themselves. That's not to say that there are many excellent trainers currently at work.

I too am curious about the class background of these traditions. Contempt for the non-scholastic means that there is almost nothing in the Chinese writer (scholastic) tradition about how they trained their horses, but they must have had their methods since they've kept and used horses for more than 3000 years with no major breaks in traditional life. Warfare as the business of the aristocracy also must enter into practice at the high end of training. Ancient Japanese warriors must have had the same need for horses trained to be highly adaptive in cavalry skirmishes, but I know of nothing about ancient training methods.

Some people seem to need to make horse training a way of demonstrating masculine dominance. I remember reading one account (written by somebody who shared space in the same for-rent stable) of a man who made it mandatory that every session with his stallion should culminate in his physically dominating the poor animal. I've always wondered how many hands and feet the guy ended up with.

Which reminds me that somebody sent me a series of pictures that show a saddle mule who urged his rider to dismount and then killed the mountain lion that had been stalking their hunting party. I think the mountain lion was about my size... P0M 21:23, 8 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Orphaned fair use image (Image:Lone Ranger and Silver (2).jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:Lone Ranger and Silver (2).jpg. I notice the 'image' page currently specifies that the image is unlicensed for use on Wikipedia and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful.

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any fair use images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Gay Cdn (talk) (email) (Contr.) 01:35, 21 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Orphaned fair use image (Image:Lone Ranger and Silver.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:Lone Ranger and Silver.jpg. I notice the 'image' page currently specifies that the image is unlicensed for use on Wikipedia and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful.

FYI, if anyone cares, I uploaded three images of the Lone Ranger and Silver, used only one, for the White (horse) article. Silver was a good example of a "true" white horse that wasn't a gray. Montanabw 20:06, 21 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] warhorse

reverting edits. Just open the picture and read the description. besides this is white armor and absolutely nonexistant during the times of the knights. reverting other edits is highly questionable pratice of you. Wandalstouring 21:09, 31 October 2006 (UTC)

Reverting edits when the tone of edit comments is snotty is not uncommon, especially when some edits made were inaccurate (trust me, there are tanks in modern "cavalry" units. So they added helicopters later on too...but the tank was the direct replacement of the horse, that's the point). I've corrected the one photo caption now that I've looked into the matter of plate armor a bit, but you are better to use a calm, NPOV tone to make an edit that improves the article, not just say that something in the article isn't working. And, the Middle Ages and the Renaissance overlap to some extent, at least in Wikipedia they do. Montanabw 22:52, 31 October 2006 (UTC)

Verifiability is lacking. No, I want a reliable source, I assume good faith, but I don't trust your statements. I have given you a source stating something about horses and I quoted it. Prove the opposite with sources. Wandalstouring 11:39, 1 November 2006 (UTC)

Stop bickering and stop making personnal attacks. I made a suggestion for structuring the article You disagree, make your own suggestion, constructive criticism. Have you ever tried to critize an article on the talk page? How long did it take until anything happened? If I say source this and that it usually means I have no more to say about it than I really want to delet this unsourced nonsense, but I assume good faith, maybe I'm wrong (that happens) and wait until it is sourced. Besides I have a lot to do with complex vandal fighting (several of them per day for months). No, I'm not the only one who fights them, so I hopefully do not delet edits of someone trying very hard to contribute. I even took a look on my contributions, well, blue water navy seems one of my recent major issues. Just take a look at the article, it's definetly a lot of my work and sourcing. Although I'm not inclined to do that in the warhorse article, I just want it on the right track. Wandalstouring 15:15, 3 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] reverting edits

If you continue to revert edits (that doubt your unsourced statements or prove you wrong based on the image description in wikicommons) one more time without the approval of others on the discussion page, I have to call an administrator. Wandalstouring 21:18, 31 October 2006 (UTC)

Don't threaten people and assume good faith. When people make edits accompanied by aggressive, snotty remarks as you did, the tendency is to discount their contributions. You catch more flies with honey than vinegar. Montanabw 22:26, 31 October 2006 (UTC)

Source your texts. Your statements are misinforming and even reading a little bit what other wikipedia articles have already sourced would help a lot to improve your unsourced factual errors. Deleting a {{fact}} template without putting a reference or deleting the doubious statement is considered a major violation of wikipedia customs. Wandalstouring 11:31, 1 November 2006 (UTC)

Further comment on your talk page. I added a citation before removing the request for citation. Montanabw 16:53, 1 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] horse pictures

Well, if you're not a big fan of the commons, its gonna be hard to find stuff ;) I agree on that Western saddle picture, too, but there aren't many well-framed, clear pictures of western saddle out there. On the commons, my favorite place for horse pictures are:

http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Horse
http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:Horses (this has quite a bit)
http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:Equestrian_sports (and all sub-categories)
http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Horse_tack -- there's another western saddle here.

Hope this helps!

What do you think of this picture for the western saddle: Image:Tinker Stute.JPG

Humm... take a look on my talk page, W---- commented. Seems a bit offended. But if he's not going to do anything but point out what's wrong, what does he expect? Eventer

[edit] horses in war

I disagree with the basic concept of the article. We have lots of military history articles focusing on cavalry forces, but this article should be about horsemanship and horse breeds, thus making less a distinction by the use in war than by the breeds used in war and training methods (from the training or vice versa we can refer briefly to their role in combat). See talk page. Wandalstouring 15:21, 5 November 2006 (UTC)

See my long reply on the talk page. Montanabw 06:38, 6 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Horse care

Hi I need to know how much it costs to take care of one horse for one month. I also need to know much one horse eats a day.--Fonkety ponk 22:17, 8 November 2006 (UTC)

Answering on your talk page. Montanabw 22:23, 8 November 2006 (UTC)

Thank you for the information.--Fonkety ponk 22:59, 8 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] about training soldiers

It is a difference for example if you train soldiers in an army emphasizing Mission-type tactics (US Marines are starting to use it increasingly) or Command and control used by US - and Sovjet forces.

Mission type soldiers must be handeld differently, the instructor has to explain a lot what he does, etc. because the soldiers have responsibilities.

Command and control means more doing what someone tells you no matter what. Wandalstouring 00:02, 10 November 2006 (UTC)

Show different methods to prepare a horse for war. Perhaps make a difference between the lighter and heavier horses. I think the heavier types were more likely to face the killing in close quarters, as they were used by the heavy cavalry. It comes to my mind, that I heard the crusaders (heavy with lances) used stallions for their aggression, while the Muslims (light with bows) used mares which were easier to control. So it is perhaps more likely that the stallions faced crueler methods to prepare them for battle and control them in the fight, I assume. Wandalstouring 15:06, 10 November 2006 (UTC)

I have a university library and some other major libraries around in case you can name me a specific title. Of course this is about generalizing and giving an overview. If someone wants to write in detail it would be better to use a chapter within an article on the culture or horse breed. Wandalstouring 22:35, 10 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Good work

You're doing a great job, have a nice drink.

I noticed you out working hard, and I thought I'd drop by with a nice glass of lemonade and say I'd seen you hard at work and that it is greatly appreciated. Keep up the great work you are doing, and if I can be of any help, please let me know. Essjay (Talk) 08:14, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

Thanks. The article Arabian horse is a nominee for Good Article status. I'd appreciate a look-see and any suggestions for improvements. I got some excellent suggestions by a reviewer for improvements, need to see if I hit what was needed. Will take a long time to get everything cited, but comments for the to do list always welcome. Any constructive suggestions on how to improve War horse also welcome--been a bit of a personality conflict over there. Created a sandbox titled Horses in Warfare to take it out back for awhile, but would like an outside, neutral look at the articles. They will eventually be merged. Montanabw 08:25, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

With regard to the conflict on War horse, I'd suggest perhaps Wikipedia:Third opinion or perhaps an informal mediation; I can't involve myself to far into the matter because of my role in dispute resolution, but that would be my starting advice. I took a glance over Arabian horse and it looks very good; I'll read it more in depth and let you know of anything I see, but I must admit, it's not really my area of expertise. :) Essjay (Talk) 08:36, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Citations

Hi,

I'll look over Arabian horse for terms that should be linked to Wiktionary and/or Wikipedia.

As for "who should I cite as the source?": If there is an original source, as for example if a famous book or person was the first to say x, then the original source is preferred. If a term is so common in a field that finding the original source is problematic, then you can do one of two things: if many people say this is from y, then you can follow the crowd and cite y. If (as is probably the case here) no one ever says what the source of this is, then just find it explained or mentioned in the most highly-regarded and authoritative source you can think of, and cite the page number etc. In that case, you wouldn't say that that source originated the term, you would just put a citation there. The reader should understand it as an authoritative source.

To shorten that whole paragraph :-) : just use common sense, and use the best source you can find. :-)

Later --Ling.Nut 13:54, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

PS -- regarding common knowledge, and leaving it uncited.. there's a bit of a gray area here; it's a bit of a judgment call at times. Sometimes just a wikilink is OK; sometimes not.

I strongly suggest that you focus on the many historical details that you left uncited. Those are clear-cut cases where cites are needed. As for common-knowledge stuff, maybe the WP:FA process can help you with that one (after more than a little work on other areas).

Later --Ling.Nut 17:19, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

Responded to your question on my talk page. :-) --Ling.Nut 19:01, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] drop me a line..

Hi again,

Please drop me a line on my talk page whenever Arabian horse goes up for FA. I'm very interested in how that goes.

Cheers, --Ling.Nut 23:08, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org../../../m/o/n/User_talk%7EMontanabw_890d.html"