Talk:Guide horse
| While the biographies of living persons policy does not apply directly to the subject of this article, it may contain material that relates to living persons, such as friends and family of persons no longer living, or living persons involved in the subject matter. Unsourced or poorly sourced contentious material about living persons must be removed immediately. If such material is re-inserted repeatedly, or if there are other concerns related to this policy, please see this noticeboard. |
 | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||
 | This article was the subject of an educational assignment in October 2012. Further details are available here. |
 | The following Wikipedia contributor has declared a personal or professional connection to the subject of this article. Relevant policies and guidelines may include conflict of interest, autobiography, and neutral point of view. Their edits to this article were last checked for neutrality on 8 June 2021 by Djm-leighpark.
|
Image
[edit]That's a good photo but has anyone else realised the horse is missing a shoe? Can we perhaps get a better image that shows a horse in full regalia, not just part thereof? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 168.140.181.4 (talk) 23:01, 9 March 2010 (UTC)
- The person in the main image at the airport seems to bear a resemblance to Don Burleson and he is in the image it may be slightly misleading. This is possible but I cannot confirm it one way or the other. Djm-leighpark (talk) 22:55, 16 May 2021 (UTC)
Horses' vision
[edit]Right... so this article has listed horses' peripheral vision as a plus for quite some time, but I've had horses nearly all my life, and the more I think about it, the less sense it seems to make. Horses do indeed have a huge field of vision- if I remember correctly, 340 degrees or even more, but most of it is monocular, their binocular vision is roughly along the line of their nose, and only when they're "using" it- paying attention to what's in front of them.
Also, there's a reason why horses often throw up their heads when people try to pet their foreheads: they're trying to see the hand! This is because they have a rather large blind spot in front of their "faces" (roughly, a cone with its tip in the middle of their foreheads, following an imaginary line perpendicular to one drawn from eye to eye). What does this have to do with anything? I don't see horses doing particularly well in "obstacle-evasion." They can tilt their heads, sure, but what about in avoiding overhead objects? Do they have to be trained to hold their noses way up all the time? - Sarranduin (Talk) 04:54, 14 November 2006 (UTC)
- That...is an amazingly good question. From what you say, it seems like Guide horses would be very, very good at avoiding tiny obstacles or things that came from the side, but bad at avoiding things at about the level of their owners' faces.
- So I don't know what to do with that entry. I'm reluctant to move it clear over to the 'disadvantages' section without verification; maybe it should be removed altogether. --Masamage 05:22, 14 November 2006 (UTC)
- It seems that continued removal is indeed the best solution... this article isn't really the place to discuss horses' vision, and unless someone actually does some sort of reasonable study on miniature horses' abilities in relation to their guide work status, saying anything would be mostly speculation.... - Sarranduin (Talk) 19:35, 14 November 2006 (UTC)
Opening paragraph
[edit]I had to edit the opening paragraph after reading the references given. The opening paragraph made the guide horse seem like a viable alternative to a guide dog, while the reference all point it is an experimental program. Jeepday 03:40, 30 January 2007 (UTC)
Categories
[edit]Any reason this article is in Category:Types of horses? Ealdgyth | Talk 19:17, 24 January 2008 (UTC)
- Because it's a type of horse--not a breed or anything, but certainly a type. Not unlike Show (animal), which is also in there. Anyway, the category header says "This category is to be used for articles that describe any distinct types of horses other than breeds." --Masamage ♫ 23:08, 24 January 2008 (UTC)
- Generally a type of horse, in horseman talk, means close to a breed, but not quite yet a breed. See Cob (horse) or Warmblood. Are they trying to breed for a specific color/conformation/use? Or is this like a guide dog program, where there isn't a specific breeding program for the animals, but instead is a training issue? The way I read the article, it's a use of the horse that isn't necessarily dependant on a specific conformation or gait. Ealdgyth | Talk 23:16, 24 January 2008 (UTC)
- I think it's part breeding and mostly training; the official website probably has more information. Anyway, I don't know about horseman talk, but it does look to me like the category is supposed to contain any group of horses that isn't genetics-based. So pit pony and polo pony and horses in warfare are all in there, too. --Masamage ♫ 23:19, 24 January 2008 (UTC)
- Yeah, well, I dropped notes on all those pages too. Not a biggie. It's the WikiProject Equine that's as much trying to figure out how the categories are actually being used so we know where to stuff some of our problem children articles. Ealdgyth | Talk 23:23, 24 January 2008 (UTC)
- Sounds fair. If those articles weren't in this category, would there be a better name for something they could go in? Uses of horses, or something? --Masamage ♫ 04:52, 25 January 2008 (UTC)
- Yeah, well, I dropped notes on all those pages too. Not a biggie. It's the WikiProject Equine that's as much trying to figure out how the categories are actually being used so we know where to stuff some of our problem children articles. Ealdgyth | Talk 23:23, 24 January 2008 (UTC)
- I think it's part breeding and mostly training; the official website probably has more information. Anyway, I don't know about horseman talk, but it does look to me like the category is supposed to contain any group of horses that isn't genetics-based. So pit pony and polo pony and horses in warfare are all in there, too. --Masamage ♫ 23:19, 24 January 2008 (UTC)
- Generally a type of horse, in horseman talk, means close to a breed, but not quite yet a breed. See Cob (horse) or Warmblood. Are they trying to breed for a specific color/conformation/use? Or is this like a guide dog program, where there isn't a specific breeding program for the animals, but instead is a training issue? The way I read the article, it's a use of the horse that isn't necessarily dependant on a specific conformation or gait. Ealdgyth | Talk 23:16, 24 January 2008 (UTC)
External links
[edit]Two of the external links appear to lead to a Japanese blog site: http://guidehorse.org/ and http://www.guidehorseno.com/ and therefore I am removing them from the article. AnselaJonla (talk) 18:59, 21 July 2014 (UTC)
- I hate it when people let their domain names expire. Montanabw(talk) 19:35, 21 July 2014 (UTC)
External links modified
[edit]Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Guide horse. 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:
- Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070310203430/http://www.nfb.org/Images/nfb/Publications/bm/bm01/bm0104/bm010404.htm to http://www.nfb.org/Images/nfb/Publications/bm/bm01/bm0104/bm010404.htm
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) 03:22, 25 October 2017 (UTC)
Oldid 1027207364
[edit]I have examined this removal by Bloodandgore which essentially reverts this contribution by Spongebubby and generally and possibly totally concur with that removal as being WP:UNDUE as written and not integrated into the article topic. That said the article, which in by opinion is a valid article topic, does need an update for various reasons, and I note [1] may be useful. Some of the individuals in this mentioned in versions of this article have had articles removed from Wikipedia and I am examining for possibly introduction in some form. Anyone with concerns see WP:BLP in particular WP:BIOSELF if necessary. I am only background working on these topics at the moment. Thankyou. 22:44, 6 June 2021 (UTC)
Guide Horse Foundation status
[edit]As of June 2021 I have a number of indicators the Guide Horse Foundation is not active and has not been active for some while. There are some indicators there is a possibility the organisation may lost control of their website on or prior to 2014, (I seem to note a re-registration of the domain at this point but that may be different things and in itself does not confirm a loss of control) and the website, which certainly contains historic content, may now contain unsafe links. In particular I note the claim "Please note that the Guide Horse Foundation is new, and we consider our program to be experimental. Due to the overwhelming number of requests for free Guide horses we have temporarily suspended the application process." introduced at some point between March 2005 [2] and September 2013 [3] (with a lack of updating of copyright year) as a possible indicator the scheme was suspended/cancelled. Thankyou -- Djm-leighpark (talk) 05:54, 7 June 2021 (UTC)
- I have just observed the same page on a mirror website (that is now closed) and the same statement quoteed above was issued between May 2008 and November 2010 and remained in place until at least 4 December 2018. (But page erroring on 3 February 2019.[4][5][6] [7]. This 2mirror" appears to me to have more continuity back to 2000 unlike the .org above.Djm-leighpark (talk) 08:23, 7 June 2021 (UTC)