Talk:Heavy warmblood

I think it's too big... Countercanter (talk) 04:27, 30 December 2007 (UTC)

My expectation was that there wouldn't be much information on the heavy warmbloods, but I've turned out to be very wrong! To come are the Rottaler, Alt-Wurttemberger, and hopefully improvements on the related Groningen Horse and Kladruber. If I can find information on the Silesian horse, that will follow also. I think it'd be best just to split it up at this point; writing an article on the korung and HLP/ZLP would probably be in order, too. Countercanter (talk) 14:48, 30 December 2007 (UTC)

Like the article and hope you add links and material from it to warmblood to cross-fertilize between the two articles. It's great to have someone with your background on these breeds on board) I don't favor the merge of the individual "breed" articles into this one, though, but I do think an extensive "see also" section would be helpful, as well as a dicussion of the "when is it a breed and when is it a registry?" Question. Wikipedia consensus seems to be pretty inclusive as to what is a "breed," and so as far as articles go, I've tended toward the "if it has a registry, it's notable enough to be a "breed" thing. Seems most NPOV, given that there is no overarching authority to say what is or is not a breed, the way the American Kennel Club is for dog breeds. Even the USEF really never was the arbiters of what a "breed" was. The edit wars otherwise are just not worth it. (You will not the list of horse breeds history is more of people adding 10,000 "breeds" and I have actually been quite firm about tossing things that are mostly subtypes or one guy's "breed") However, the question of when a breed is a breed could be an interesting topic to take up over on the project page. (I mean, I have Arabians,so IMHO EVERYTHING else is a new kid on the block!) (LOL) Montanabw^(talk) 00:06, 31 December 2007 (UTC)

Reassessed to "mid," there is an argument either way, but I tend to hesitate to label anything less than 200 years old above mid, before we know it, there will be "grade inflation" and everything will be bumped up. I won't take this one to the mat, but I will defer to Countercanter for an assessment of if there is one "foundation" warmblood article (maybe this one, maybe another) to rank "high," which of the major, significant warmblood breeds to rank "mid" (like Trakehner) and the rest are probably going to be "low" due to obscurity or low numbers. Does that work?? Montanabw^(talk) 04:40, 25 January 2008 (UTC)