Talk:Ameraucana

Chickenbreed Infobox

A new infobox {{Infobox Chickenbreed}} has been created for chicken articles. If you see anywhere it needs improved please contact User:Stepshep. If it meets your criteria it is requested you add it to this article's page for standardization. Thanks! §hep • ¡Talk to me! 16:57, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

WikiProject Food and drink Tagging

This article talk page was automatically added with {{WikiProject Food and drink}} banner as it falls under Category:Food or one of its subcategories. If you find this addition an error, Kindly undo the changes and update the inappropriate categories if needed. The bot was instructed to tagg these articles upon consenus from WikiProject Food and drink. You can find the related request for tagging here . Maximum and careful attention was done to avoid any wrongly tagging any categories , but mistakes may happen... If you have concerns , please inform on the project talk page -- TinucherianBot (talk) 06:56, 4 July 2008 (UTC)

origins

Ok... I'm no expert, but this article seemed a little confused so I attempted to fix it. There seemed to be some contradiction between this article and the article Araucana. That article states that easter eggers are mixed breeds between the Araucana and other chickens, wheras this article stated that both derive from the easter eggers mixed with others. I assumed that the Araucana article must be correct, for the simple reason that it would have been impossible for the Araucana to have been derived from "the non-standard Easter Eggers mated to other chickens" because in the time and place the Araucanas were bred (pre-European contact South America/West Polynesia) they were the only chickens available! There were no "other chickens" for them to mate with. --86.158.29.112 (talk) 19:27, 27 September 2008 (UTC)

Hey i have one a buff she is so cute i named her Gushers due to her muffs and beard anyway i edited the page under the characteristics section because i have one and studied there species-Boba fett 32 (talk) 15:08, 6 July 2009 (UTC)

Face feathering

I bring into question the factuality of the comment on the vital importance of fully feathered faces. Chicken breeds from the Russian tundra have non-feathered faces, as do Icelandic chickens. Both these places also have frost for months at a time. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 130.243.175.19 (talk) 13:21, 15 August 2010 (UTC)

Revisions to the History of this Page

Hi, Stevemneumann! I'm afraid you don't have any claim over this page or its content. Wikipedia follows its own policies and guidelines, and you might perhaps like to read up on a few of them before you ask too many more people to educate themselves. Among the most relevant here are:

• Verifiability: Wikipedia is built on what is reported in independent reliable sources; it does not take any account of unpublished personal expertise or knowledge, nor does it – in general – pay much attention to parties such as breed associations, which often have a vested or commercial interest in promoting a particular version of the facts
• Neutrality: Wikipedia maintains a neutral point of view. Editors with a conflict of interest – a close personal or professional connection to the topic – may find it difficult or impossible to write about it in a neutral way. They are encouraged to raise concerns about accuracy and so on on the talk-page of the article, rather than editing the article itself.

If there are specific inaccuracies in the article as it stands, do please point them out, here on this page, citing the independent source which supports your version of the facts. That would be most helpful. Thank you, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 18:33, 28 July 2019 (UTC)

Justlettersandnumbers! Very good points about the conflict of interest. Being as I am with the club, perhaps I shouldn't be editing this wikipedia entry. I take that point, and will make no further efforts to edit but will put my comments here. I can totally relate to your desire for verifiability. However, if you exclude the breed clubs from this information, breed clubs composed of the people who created the breed and experts knowledgeable about the standard and genetics, then they don't have the ability to correct the information even though they are the people who know the most about the subject. This would be like telling Mark Zuckerberg that he can't comment on the wiki entry for how Facebook was created because he's biased. So we have to leave it to people who don't exactly understand how it happened to blunder there way around technical issues and create conceptual mistakes through their lack of first person understanding, which Mark Zuckerberg or any other first people at Facebook are then unable to set the record straight on because they too are "biased." The published histories and FAQ's at both American breed clubs (which I cited) http://ameraucana.org/FAQ http://ameraucanabreedersclub.org/faq.html, clearly state that Ameraucanas were not derived from Araucanas (the rumpless and tufted breed.) Without an explanation of the breed admission process in the 1970's that I included, people can't understand the confusion and why this misconception exists. I absolutely agree with you on a matter of neutrality, but the governing authority in the United States that recognizes breeds is the American Poultry Association and American Bantam Association. Without a governing authority to recognize a breed, a breed doesn't exist because people can't agree upon what constitutes that breed. This is something that people outside of poultry don't understand. The constant deletions of club history ignores that these clubs are the ones singularly responsible for this breed existing in the first place. You deleted my edit that included the cited original document where the club voted on the name of the breed. Breeds are not inherent things that just magically happen. They are all created and officially recognized. You deleted my cited article from National Geographic that clearly explains the state of those first birds that came from Chile. They were not Araucanas, as Araucanas exist today under the breed standard. Look at page 377. The first birds that were imported to the US were mutts. Easter Eggers. https://archive.org/stream/NationalGeographic201505/National%20Geographic%201948-09%20094-3%20Sep#page/n103/mode/2up Out of these mutts, BOTH breeds Araucanas and Ameraucanas were created, but they were all called Araucanas to start with until the APA admitted only one phenotype of bird with that name. The history needs the record of this for people to understand. Also deleted with my revisions was an article from the American Poultry Association (again, the governing authority on breeds in North America) that uploaded this to show people the difference. http://www.amerpoultryassn.com/Poultry%20Articles/Ameraucana%20vs.%20Araucana,%20%20&%20Americana%20%28The%20Easter%20Egger%29.pdf Those illustrations are directly from the American Standard of Perfection, commissioned to identify exactly what the breeds are supposed to look like that show the difference. The two breeds look nothing alike and aside from blue eggs and pea combs, and red earlobes, they have very little in common (which is probably why the APA wouldn't admit both versions back in the 70's, because they were too different to be regarded the same breed). Ameraucanas share more in common with Old English Game and Australorp, since the breed relied heavily on those genetics. Again, this is all in the official club history, in the handbooks. I don't know what kind of citation would make you happy to leave any edits or sources of mine in place. You have reverted back to this same article abandoning everybody's edits multiple times, especially club sources. I don't want to seek a dispute over the edits of this page, but denying the clubs any input on this wiki, and deciding that their history is biased and has to be excluded is in itself biased. I am happy to cite anything on my edits that you feel are unsubstantiated, but the sources may be from physical handbooks published by the clubs. There are only a few dozen serious breeders of Ameraucanas in the United States at any given time who are guardians of the genetics of the breed, many years of selection to get birds to standard. These handbooks were written for them, with the knowledge that anybody who is truly serious about the breed will eventually gravitate toward the clubs to seek out mentorship and birds from master breeders and to learn their craft and have access to their genetics and breeding knowledge. The breed history IS club history, collected in breed reports, bulletins, newsletters, and handbooks that nobody outside the club ever asks to see for reference. Even though you can read them yourself here: http://ameraucana.org/archives People mistakenly believe that some amateur generalist who writes a coffee table book about breeds is more neutral and fair in their presentation of information than an organization dedicated to the breed, even though the entry on Storey's Illustrated guide is erroneous on multiple points. In fact, I will ask John Blehm to contact their press to see if he can't get them to edit that in a new edition. I can't blame you for presenting information that is wrong if it's published in a book. Obviously the clubs were not consulted for that publication either and bad info was etched in stone, just like bad info populates blogs from the 2000's. I apologize for my confrontational initial message and have deleted it because I maybe have not assumed goodwill in the revisions. We Ameraucana breeders are constantly battling incorrect information about our breed. It is almost a right of passage having the "everything you learned about Ameraucanas on the internet is wrong" conversation with new breeders. And it gets old. And it never gets better. Justlettersandnumbers, I am happy to mail you printed handbook with the history of the Ameraucana. Normally it comes with club membership only, but I am happy to pay for this for you and send it to you since you seem to be passionately interested in the subject and informing the world about it. My email is stevemneumann@gmail.com

How to pronounce Ameraucana

I just wanted to know how to pronounce the name properly. 2601:483:201:2E70:B97E:4226:A3CD:8665 (talk) 19:54, 27 December 2021 (UTC)