Talk:Cultural depictions of dogs

In Heraldry

The "In Heraldry" section has a lot of basic facts about heraldry, but ZERO facts about the use of dogs in heraldry. Can someone elaborate or delete? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.160.228.162 (talk) 02:04, 3 January 2014 (UTC)

Good point. Have you some ideas? Her there is actually a whole cathegory on commons about it, and here we have some stuff and references, so hold on with deletion. Talbot (dog) and more here [1] and here [2] and this one is just greeat, eh? [3]. Gules, two greyhounds salient counter-salient in saltire(the dexter surmounted by the sinister) argent, collared of the field between three fleurs-de-lys two and one; in chief a stag’s head couped attired with ten tynes or– from UDNEY, Scotland. Sagaciousphil, who made this article will be very interested. Hafspajen (talk) 13:32, 3 January 2014 (UTC)=

Thanks both of you, especially Hafspajen for finding those extra sources and adding some info. I will try to do some further work on this but it may well take a few weeks before I can get round to it! SagaciousPhil - Chat 11:17, 4 January 2014 (UTC)

Other pictures for as soon we have a text 18-th century

• 
• 
• 
• 
  1530s
• 
• 
  1562
• 
  Jean Honore Fragonard The Love Letter
• 
• 
• 
• 
  1653
• 
• 
  1676-87
• 
• 
  1585 and 1587
• 
  1744
• 
  1742
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
  Lady Hamilton (as Nature) Crazy dog
• 

Other

• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
  Renoir
• 
  .
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
  1810
• 
• 
  1800
• 
• 

Dogs in art is a redirect now. Hafspajen (talk) 15:57, 24 January 2014 (UTC) Dog in artHafspajen (talk) 16:03, 24 January 2014 (UTC)

19th-20th century

• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 

Theme

Sorry but I know nothing about Chinese dogs, except that Mao didn't liked them. There was some kind of start here with Japanese collection, but was never added due to lack of refs and literature. Anyone who can add details, why not. Hafspajen (talk) 00:37, 4 February 2015 (UTC).

• Since there is a separate article on Dog in Chinese mythology, no need to expand this one. It would be just repeating the same thing. Hafspajen (talk) 11:21, 4 February 2015 (UTC)

• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
  Dogs in art????
• 
• 

Court ladies playing with a small dog, Beauties Wearing Flowers by Tang Dynasty painter Zhou Fang

Recent page move

@Hafspajen: Why you have changed the article title? I know that there is hardly any material that would speak about the non-western depiction, still there is some content about non-western depictions. OccultZone (Talk • Contributions • Log) 11:25, 4 February 2015 (UTC)

• Because of this tagg. https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Cultural_depictions_of_dogs_in_Western_art&diff=645518796&oldid=645452070

There is no point in starting adding a lot of Oriental material when there are separate articles, like Dog in Chinese mythology. I can remove all non-Westen stuff. Hafspajen (talk) 11:27, 4 February 2015 (UTC)

• That maintenance template was correct, the article had to be expanded. There are many depictions of dogs in Eastern Asia and Africa like Tassili-n-Ajjer of Algeria. OccultZone (Talk • Contributions • Log) 11:40, 4 February 2015 (UTC)

That depends on how you define the article. It is true, it is mainly about depictions of dogs in Western art. It was a correctly tagged until the article was called Cultural depictions of dogs. But since the article is only about depictions of dogs in Western art, we can just call that for about depictions of dogs in Western art too. However starting now covering every other culture's dog depiction would be a lot of work and there is no nee since there are so many articles covering it. Feel free to start Depictions of dogs in Eastern Asia... or Cultural depictions of dogs in Eastern art. Hafspajen (talk) 11:46, 4 February 2015 (UTC)

It is like the Winter landscapes in Western art -when we chosed the name we were quite aware of that exists waste amounts of pictures from Japanes and China too, so we wanted to cover only this part. Or Night in art, that is separated into Night in paintings (Western art) and Night in paintings (Eastern art). Hafspajen (talk) 11:52, 4 February 2015 (UTC)

Amazon

Thank you for the name move. I took the redirect at Cultural depictions of dogs‎ and made it into a stub. --BB12 (talk) 23:40, 4 February 2015 (UTC)

• Sure but I might think you probably would need some depictions too... And You also need some other text that is not in this article. Right now you just copied over a paragraph from this one. Hafspajen (talk) 00:25, 5 February 2015 (UTC)

I'm sorry, but I don't know a lot about the topic. I do agree that more text is required, but I am not very qualified to do that. Ideas could be put on that talk page. --BB12 (talk) 21:12, 5 February 2015 (UTC)

• Yeah, the tag was valid, and so is the move--a simple solution. I do wonder about "cultural", though. It seems humans are the only critters to depict things, and everything we do is cultural, so it seems a bit redundant. The "depiction" part is a bit questionable also, and that's why I removed Argos from the other article, before I realized it was here as well: the dog is not depicted, so mentioning it seems valid only if there is artwork illustrating the dog (who gets no descriptive lines in the Odyssey--for the fans, it's early on in Book 17, line 317 in the Lombardo translation). Anyway, yeah, BB12 needs to find some more content, but that can be done. I would like all y'all to think about the grammar of terms like "cultural" and "depiction", because it will indicate what you want these articles to be. Drmies (talk) 19:45, 5 February 2015 (UTC)

• Argos is mentioned in the context of Homers and there are depictions of this scene on old Greek vases. Maybe that can be mentioned of course. What I wonder about - that the new stubb doesnt contain anything that is much different from this one. Actually the material is in both because it was simply copied from this one. A rather doubtful way - I think. Hafspajen (talk) 19:52, 5 February 2015 (UTC)

It is a stub and therefore is only a beginning. It allows the Wikipedia community and general public to develop the article. --BB12 (talk) 21:14, 5 February 2015 (UTC)

You are allowed to create stubbs but when the same material exists in both articles, there is not much point in it. Hafspajen (talk) 21:32, 5 February 2015 (UTC)

The point is to give people a base to start from. --BB12 (talk) 04:59, 6 February 2015 (UTC)

I really don't agree. If somebody wants to do an article they will do it. Like this there is nothing in that stubb that's not there. This is not a way of creating articles, chopping of a bit of an actual article and turning a redirect into a stubb. Hafspajen (talk) 17:25, 6 February 2015 (UTC)

• My oppinion is - if you follow me - that there is NO NEED to have a generic dog in art depiction article with a DOUBLE duplicate content. Hafspajen (talk) 20:35, 6 February 2015 (UTC)

Thank you for your clarification. I hope my point is equally as clear. --BB12 (talk) 21:27, 6 February 2015 (UTC)

Un regal pour son animal de compagnie

• Depends on what you mean. There is not much depictions of dogs that is not covered already. The reason why this article was mostly about Western culture, was because no other culture depicts dogs in the same way, as companions and as an important part of their culture, with the exception Chinese and Japaneses depictions, and Dog in Chinese mythology deals a bit with it. Dogs in ancient China could possibly illustrated.

Most other cultures don't really depict dogs, other than in a religious context, and Islam and dogs, Dogs in Mesoamerican folklore and myth, Category:Dogs in Hinduism deals a bit with it, Dogs in religion deals a little with that part too. Maybe you expect me to write that article, but I won't. And I don't agree that my work should be copied and used in the other article. The only one that is missing is Dogs in Oriental art. You tagged this article because you thought it was plain ignorance, but it was not really that simple. As we take a look throughout art history there is an overwhelming presence of pets in painting in the Western art. The kind of depictions like the Portrait of Charles V with a Dog simply doesn't exists in other cultures. It started during the Middle Ages since then the dogs are pets as we know them today. They were brought the houses and were allowed to live in the house and cherished as part of the the family, even if this was happening mostly in the upper classes who could afford to feed them. And from the wey beginning it started with the Ancient Greek's preferance for dogs. The same middle class could afford to depict them too. Anybody can check it out at So actually, in the end we could simply move back the whole thing by stating this, too. Hafspajen (talk) 23:29, 6 February 2015 (UTC)

I mean the thing is very simple: in order to be able talk about art you have art + depictions of the subject. To be able to write about dogs in art it has to exist depictions of dogs. See also History of art + Western art history and Eastern art historyHafspajen (talk) 00:49, 7 February 2015 (UTC)

Very much the same as dog breeding. It reflects the same value - scale. Hafspajen (talk) 00:03, 7 February 2015 (UTC)

In that case, changing the article name perhaps was not the best thing to do. Instead, addressing the tag might have been more productive. One way to do that is to simply write in the introduction that there isn't much depiction of dogs outside of the West and add a section about non-Western depictions. Doing that after changing the name back is still a possibility. --BB12 (talk) 05:41, 7 February 2015 (UTC)

• Phil, Sagaciousphil ... what do you think??? Hafspajen (talk) 16:14, 7 February 2015 (UTC)

Depiction

I don't feel overly strongly, I guess, on the depiction-of-dogs deletion.

It all depends on how "depiction" is understood.

If the word is understood to mean "represent by or as if by a picture", then it would not be appropriate.

If, however, it were understood to also mean -- per the commonly accepted additional dictionary definition -- ""to describe (... something) using words, a story, etc.", then at minimum the description of dogs as as unclean scavengers, and representing faithfulness, under different religions, is relevant here. --Epeefleche (talk) 21:49, 19 March 2015 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Cultural depictions of the dog. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.dogworld.co.uk/product.php/2223/Features/35-Waters-%282%29
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140113235416/http://www.dogpainting.com/info_detail.cfm?type=referance&info_name=VICTORIANENGLAND&index=2 to http://www.dogpainting.com/info_detail.cfm?type=referance&info_name=VICTORIANENGLAND&index=2

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 10:23, 15 August 2017 (UTC)