Jump to content

Talk:Corsican cattle

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Requested moves

[edit]
The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: consensus to move the pages, per the discussion below. Dekimasuよ! 20:11, 25 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

– Per MOS:LIFE, MOS:CAPS, and consistency with virtually all other domestic breed article names that include the species after the breed name (cf. Corsican horse, Enderby Island cattle, New Zealand red rabbit, etc., etc., etc.). The added species common name at the end ("cattle", "rabbit") is not capitalized, because it's not part of the formal name of the breed; the species is capitalized only in the few cases when it is invariably part of the name, as in American Quarter Horse, Norwegian Forest Cat. (I'm going on the assumption that we want to capitalize breed names at all, as we're mostly presently doing. Thus the inclusion of Georgian mountain cattle, where "Mountain" is part of the sourced breed name. If some object to capitalizing breed names, I would suggest that this RM is not the place for that discussion, so please don't cloud the RM by injecting arguments relating to that other topic.)  — SMcCandlish ☺ ☏ ¢ ≽ʌⱷ҅ᴥⱷʌ≼  12:21, 15 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

See previous, near-identical mass-move request at Talk:Alentejana cattle#Requested move, which concluded to stick with natural, non-parenthetical disambiguation and lower-case species name.
There is an ongoing status quo ante RM discussion at Talk:Teeswater sheep that raises the same WP:NATURAL issue, but it's not a discussion on the merits, but about whether to revert to parenthetical disambiguation pending such a discussion, and thus has no impact on this RM. — SMcCandlish ☺ ☏ ¢ ≽ʌⱷ҅ᴥⱷʌ≼  00:58, 21 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment SMcCandlish ☺ having just Googled a number of names I would tend to Support the move of all the cattle (inc. sheep) and Oppose the move of all the rabbits. I appreciate what the guidelines say but, in the case of various domestic animals, the guidelines may be wrong.
IDEA: I'd suggest that domestic pigeon varieties might provide one benchmark for an assessment of domestic animals. At least it might be one that might have met Darwin's approval. He cited them as being a long bred and obsessed over category of domestic bird. Here's one source related to the subject.
Gregkaye ✍♪ 13:20, 16 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Where sources aren't consistent, WP prefers lower case, as do external style authorities like Chicago Manual of Style and Oxford\Hart's. Note that Chicago (16th ed., section 8, subsection 128) is even more adamant about lower case that WP is, accepting almost no capitalization for breed names except where they contain proper names like "German, "Hereford", "Maine", etc.  — SMcCandlish ☺ ☏ ¢ ≽ʌⱷ҅ᴥⱷʌ≼  04:15, 20 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support per nom. Checking a few rabbit breeds in books, I don't see Gregkaye's point, or why he says the guidelines might be wrong. For example: [1], [2]. The many web hits with the caps are mostly wikipedia copies, not sources. Dicklyon (talk) 05:56, 17 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • As noted above, where sources aren't consistent, WP prefers lower case as do external style authorities. If you do searches that exclude Wikipedia [3], you find usage radically mixed, but following obvious and consistent usage patterns: Lists and encyclopedias that use title case (like most sources), not sentence case (like WP) for titles of entries, use the format "Strasser Pigeon", while mainstream sources that aren't focused on birds use lower case, "Strasser pigeon" (or even "strasser pigeon", not recognizing "Strasser" as a proper name), while pigeon-specific sources just use "Strasser", because adding "pigeon" is redundant in that context. As WP is neither a work that uses title case in this way, nor a specialist bird work, we have two reasons to use lower case vs. zero to use upper. While pigeons are not the subject of this RM at all, we get the same pattern in properly constructed search results for rabbits, etc. Note carefully that in complex cases like a search on "Continental Giant rabbit" -Wikipedia [4], the same patterns emerge, and when we find people who do capitalize the unique, formal part of the breed name, they do not always capitalize the species: "This is Noah, my Continental Giant rabbit...", and almost always omit it because it's clear in those contexts that they mean rabbits. Most cases of "Continental Giant Rabbit", with all capitalized, are headings, headlines, and advertising copy, all circumstances in which people tend to capitalize everything but "of" and the like. The results clearly indicate that the breed name is "Continental Giant"; calling it "Continental Giant Rabbit", all capitalized as the formal breed name, is WP:OR and directly contradicted by reliable sources, like the very breed standards themselves.[5] As a WP article title, "Continental Giant" implies a real or mythical big person from mainland Europe, because WP is not a rabbit breed list a no one but a rabbit breeds expert would ever expect that name to refer to rabbits. This very issue was already settled in a recent previous successful RM, of West African Dwarf to West African Dwarf goat, and it wasn't the first such move. I'm also unaware of any going in the opposite direction (the WP:CONCISE case simply can't surmount the concerns raises by other WP:CRITERIA). — SMcCandlish ☺ ☏ ¢ ≽ʌⱷ҅ᴥⱷʌ≼  04:15, 20 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Off-topic discussion about pigeons and parenthetical disambiguation
  • That's just your personal and highly idiosyncratic interpretation. A different one, more in keeping with all or almost all other articles we have that cover both a landrace and standardized breed with the same name, is simply that the name is ambiguous. If one of these articles were ever to split, e.g. this one, we would have Strasser pigeon (breed) and Strasser pigeon (landrace). An argument can be made that because the article covers both a landrace and a breed (two topics), and both still exist, it should be Strasser pigeons (if the landrace is extinct, it's just one topic - the landrace was forcibly evolved by humans into a breed). None of this in any way implies we should use Strasser (pigeon) for anything but a famous individual pigeon named Strasser. You have this theory, for some unexplained reason, that "breeds must use parenthetic disambiguation", but there's nothing to support that idea anywhere on Wikipedia, and we have a policy, WP:NATURAL, that disproves it. And as with so man of the posts you've been making across these RMs, it's off-topic here. This RM does not involved natural vs. parenthetical disambiguation at all, just capitalization. Please stop muddying these RMs with extraneous arguments.  — SMcCandlish ☺ ☏ ¢ ≽ʌⱷ҅ᴥⱷʌ≼  12:35, 26 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
More to the point, the rationale "tended to be capitalised" doesn't come close to the criterion that MOS:CAPS uses for what to capitalize. We should follow our house style, not let sources vote for us. Dicklyon (talk) 04:44, 20 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support: sheep, dog, cattle, or pig (etc...) does not need to be capitalized, unless it is a part of the actual name (proper noun) per references. This is covered at Capitalisation and italicisation.
Parenthesis is covered at Wikipedia:Disambiguation#Naming the specific topic articles. #2- A disambiguating word or phrase can be added in parentheses but adds but it is usually better to rephrase such a title to avoid parentheses (for instance, Vector (spatial) was renamed to Euclidean vector).. This is followed by Natural disambiguation is generally preferable to parenthetical disambiguation;.
All "wiki-lawyering" aside "Natural disambiguation is generally preferable" does not mean to put parenthesis on every article title possible, and also states If natural disambiguation is not available, a parenthetical is used.
In my opinion so many move requests are moot by just these policies and guidelines except for those that don't care to attempt to follow them. Otr500 (talk) 07:16, 30 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
That's the entire point of some of these RMs; WP:NATURAL says to not put parentheses on all these article titles; it should only be done as a last resort. However, this particular RM is about capitalization.  — SMcCandlish ☺ ☏ ¢ ≽ʌⱷ҅ᴥⱷʌ≼  09:57, 2 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

PigeonIP's commentary

[edit]
for the rabbits:
regarding the cattle (beef cattle, dairy cattle, dad.fao)
regarding the sheep
goats:
taking WP:PRECISE in count as well, I have to vote Oppose --PigeonIP (talk) 21:25, 20 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
additional comment: regarding every rabbit-RM done September, 15th: on Talk:Flemish_Giant#Requested_moves
Presenting the argument: Recognised (pet/fancy) Breeds shall not be moved to titles like Buzz rabbit. It shall be possible to distinguish them with Buzz (rabbit) or Buzz Rabbit (if "Rabbit" is part of the recognised name) from wild and feral animals as well as from groups of animals, that are named similar, because of similar characteristics. A more detailed scheme is provided on Talk:Strasser pigeon#requested move. --PigeonIP (talk) 10:58, 24 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
This time (unlike with most of these huge lists you've been posting in related RMs) this one is on-topic and in a few places actually helpful. It tells us all of the following are the correct names at WP, per WP:NATURAL: Altex rabbit, Georgian Mountain cattle, Limia cattle, Glan cattle, Normande cattle, Pajuna cattle, Sayaguesa cattle, Arapawa sheep, Pomeranian Coarsewool sheep. In all of these cases, your sourcing, thin though it may be, shows either a) the name without the species is the formal breed name, or b) sources disagree on whether the name with or without the species is the real breed name, in which case we default to the instructions in WP:NCCAPS, WP:MOSCAPS and WP:MOSLIFE: Use lower case. As for the rest, they're basically not well sourced enough to deflect this RM.
Details:

If there really are two breeds called "Georgian Mountain", and both are notable, the article can either cover both or we can have two articles disambiguated by region; it's not a rationale against this RM.

Corsican cattle, Kasaragod Dwarf cattle: You personally not finding a source or enough sources for them to be sure isn't enough to deflect this RM. Absent consistent reliable sourcing that the formal name of the breed is "Corsican Cattle" capitalized like that, WP:NATURAL, WP:NCCAPS, MOS:LIFE and MOS:CAPS all point to Corsican cattle as the correct name. Nothing wrong with Kasagarod cattle, but your lone source is insufficient evidence that there aren't both a regular and dwarf breed, so stick to the proposed name until you have proof.

German Angus cattle: Your argument doesn't seem to address any WP:AT issue, so use this format per all the above policies and guidelines.

Murboden cattle is fine, but we might actually prefer Murbodener cattle if Murboden is a trademark (we shouldn't prefer one commercial interest over broader interests). Similar case with Vorderwald cattle vs. Vorderwälder cattle. We would still naturally disambiguate both of these, since they're ethnonyms, like Berliner and Dortmunder. Regardless what names we prefer with what sources eventually, fix the faulty capitalization now.

Randall cattle: Sounds like this could be Randall Lineback or Lineback cattle; regardless, Randall cattle appears to satisfy the WP:CRITERIA, and even if another name is preferable at some point, there's no reason not to fix the improper capitalization of "Cattle" here, per all the guidelines cited already.

Tyrolese Grey cattle: Same as for Randall; we may want to move it to Tyrolean, but fix the capitalization fault in the interim. NB: The FAO is not the only reliable source on breed names. I'm not sure it's really a reliable one at all for such matters. It's an inter-governmental food and agriculture bureaucracy that frequently makes up its own names and definitions for things.

Drenthe Heath sheep: One source (the same iffy FAO one) is insufficient evidence that the formal name of this breed is Drenthe Heath Sheep, with "Sheep" capitalized. When in doubt, lower case. Same goes for Chamois Coloured goat; we need multiple reliable sources that the "Goat" is always included and capitalized, otherwise multiple guidelines say use lower case.

Ustyurt Mountain sheep may actually need to be Ustyurt mountain sheep; is it a mountain sheep variaety named for Ustyurt, or a sheep variety named for "Ustyurt Mountain? No matter what, "sheep" should be lower case here.

At any rate, rambling lists of hand-selected sources are not a proper naming convention proposal of any kind.  — SMcCandlish ☺ ☏ ¢ ≽ʌⱷ҅ᴥⱷʌ≼  09:57, 2 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Corsican_cattle&oldid=1201161224"