Talk:Bedlington Terrier

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

	Dogs Portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Dogs, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to articles on Canines on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.
Start	This article has been rated as Start-Class on the Project's quality scale.
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the importance scale.
Article Grading: The following comments were left by the quality and importance raters: (edit comments - comment history - watch comments · refresh this page) Bedlingtons should not be listed with fighting dogs. Hafwyn (talk) 14:32, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Photo

I added a photo of a very lamblike Bedlington which I took with a cel-phone. It's not a great picture, but when I get my new 8 mpix camera and that woman brings her dog back in, I'll snap a better one. Maybe someone else can get a better photo of a lamb cut bedlington.

ReignMan 18:42, 19 December 2006 (UTC)

Thanks, Jeri, for checking the page! This talk page is for info about the article; you can see the info for the photo by clicking on the photo to get a larger info and details about the dogs, names, etc. Same thing as clicking here: Image:BedlingtonTerriers_wb.jpg. So I used what you put here to update what was already on the photo's description page. Aren't they lovely dogs! Elf | Talk 03:03, 1 May 2004 (UTC)

[edit] NOt a Dog-fighting breed

You've got to be kidding that this breed was ever used specifically for fighting. I'm sure that almost any breed was used by someone for some inane reason for fighting at some time, but I find it very hard to believe that the purpose of this breed was ever for dog fighting. Can you cite references? Elf | Talk 01:01, 23 September 2005 (UTC)

It was definitely used for dog fighting and I can give a citation, if needed. Please stop following me around the Wiki it is weird. LaLa 02:23, 23 September 2005 (UTC)

Citations are good. Reference sections are good. Elf | Talk 02:32, 23 September 2005 (UTC)

Cited Quote:

These do-all dogs were able to do almost anything asked of them, if in classic terrier manner. In contrast to its placid appearance, Bedlingtons would have to be able hold its own when pitted in dog fighting contests and was particularly well known to fight to the death when set upon.[1] ^ Shaw, Vero. (1879 - 1881). The Classic Encyclopedia of the Dog. ISBN 051743282X

This is from his book published in 1880. The exact quote is not given, nor is the historical context; this does not refer to today's dog. The same author in another book, "The Illustrated Book of the Dog", published the following year (1881), seems to be correcting himself: "The Bedlington has very erroneously been given the character of a savage, headstrong dog..." (pg 118). In 1910, another author ((Robert Leighton, who cites Vero Shaw as a source) wrote that although the Bedlington could be "jealous" of other dogs, "by himself he is perfect. As a companion he is peculiarly affectionate and faithful, and remarkably intelligent; he makes a capital house-dog, is a good guard and is very safe with children." ("Dogs and all about them", 1910, available as part of the Gutenburg Project.)

That was 100 to 120 years ago! Today the Bedlington is described this way: "Calmer and less boisterous than many other terriers, the Bedlington Terrier is known as a dog with a good nature and mild manners."

Describing today's dog as a fighting dog, besides not being true, runs the risk of putting people's pets in danger.

Hafwyn (talk) 14:36, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Citations missing, and then some

This article is interesting and readable, but clearly written by someone familiar with the breed aiming the piece at other readers who are familiar with dogs. There are statements casually thrown out that should have proper references (e.g., the section about dog-fighting) as well as a lot of very subjective terms or phrases that would only make sense to someone enthusiastic about this breed or dogs in general. For example, what is meant by "sparkling eyes" (they look like regular dark brown dog eyes to me), or "do-all dogs" (can they pull sleds like huskies? rescue fishermen like Newfoundland dogs? race like greyhounds?). What's a "mincing" gait and how fast is "gallop at great speed" in real terms or compared with any other dog of similar size? "Argumentative and every inch a terrier" is a lovely phrase but it doesn't actually mean anything without some explanation. How are they argumentative? Do they speak? If they were not every inch a terrier, how many inches would be Great Dane or St Bernard? Is this inch-to-breed ratio unusual for terriers? Are most other terriers undersupplied in the percentage of terrier inches they contain?

So instead of breathless adjectives, this article would benefit from line-by-line citations alongside every fact supplied. Don't add a chunk of books at the end without explaining which facts they support. Instead, use the References template and add citations in the text, so readers can verify each fact clearly themselves. For an example, see Halfbeak. Cheers, Neale Neale Monks 08:52, 20 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] No citation, can it be removed now?

The sock-puppet installed reference to dog fighting Bedlingtons has never been cited. It has nothing to do with today's dog anyway.

Hafwyn (talk) 22:40, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] So what is this about?

Does a reference from the 1800s have anything to do with today's dog? Why are people so attached to the idea of this fluffy pet being a "fighting dog"? The Wikipedia page is reproduced and quoted around the web: is this a platform for someone who wants to get rid of Bedlingtons? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.115.133.27 (talk) 16:32, 1 April 2008 (UTC)