Talk:Hog Island sheep

References

The following references are found using a quick Google search "Hog Island Sheep":

• http://hogislandsheep.org/
• http://www.history.org/foundation/journal/summer07/sheep.cfm
• http://www.ansi.okstate.edu/breeds/sheep/hogisland/index.htm
• http://www.albc-usa.org/cpl/hogisland.html

Der Elbenkoenig (talk) 02:40, 20 October 2011 (UTC)

Here are a few sources that I stumbled across in a quick online search. I don't think any of them are duplicates of what is already in the article, but if so, then I apologize in advance:

• USDA article on rare breed preservation with specific discussion of HIS
• The Encyclopedia of Historic and Endangered Livestock and Poultry Breeds - I know Steven Walling has a print copy of this book, as well
• SVF Foundation article on HIS
• Sheep Magazine article on rare breed preservation with specific discussion of HIS

I don't know how much new information these sources will give you, but hopefully they will be of some help. It looks like you've made a good start, and I look forward to watching the article develop. I have no doubt this article can go to GA status, and with enough digging, FA just might be possible. My only qualm is that on some of these rare livestock breeds it's hard to come up with enough information to make an article "comprehensive", which is a FA requirement, rather than "broad", which is the GA requirement. Please let me know if you have any questions or would like help with anything. Dana boomer (talk) 18:24, 28 October 2011 (UTC)

Another one I have which has a page on this breed is Storey's Illustrated Guide. Let me know if there's anything you need from them etc. I definitely think this could become a GA with not a lot of effort, like some other sheep breed articles. Steven Walling • talk 23:44, 30 October 2011 (UTC)

Merge

Hog Island Sheep is a duplicate topic with unreferenced material until yesterday. I suggest that whether that topic is redirected here or that anything useful is merged here to Hog Island sheep. Regards, SunCreator ^(talk) 16:05, 22 October 2011 (UTC)

What exactly would be the pros/cons of merging that article into this one vs. this one into that one? Hog Island sheep does have already referenced material, but in an ideal situation in the long run, the article that ends up being the main one has far more references and information than either of the articles currently do. Which capitalization format is more acceptable? I had begun work on Hog Island Sheep because that capitalization scheme appeared to make more sense to me and I assumed the other one would just be a redirect. Is having each word capitalized ("title case") acceptable, or should only the first word be capitalized (sentence case)? Der Elbenkoenig (talk) 00:25, 23 October 2011 (UTC)

The pro of merging to Hog Island sheep from Hog Island Sheep is that given none of the material was reference until recently by you the page can simply be changed to a redirect(assuming you agree). The con of merging Hog Island sheep into Hog Island Sheep is that because some of it is referenced it can't just be removed (see WP:PRESERVE) and thus it would be required to merged (WP:MERGETEXT) due to copyright licensing requirement., it's a little more effort to merge rather the redirect, but no big deal either way. Regards, SunCreator ^(talk) 14:10, 23 October 2011 (UTC)

Regarding the capitialisation of the article wording. So far as I can tell there is no firm standard for this article, two guidelines to check are WP:FNAME(covering fauna) and WP:CAPS(covering everything). WP:CAPS recommends lowercase except for proper nouns; I'm assuming 'Hog Island' is a real place and thus that part would be a proper noun. The 'sheep' or 'Sheep' is not covered in WP:FNAME, it's not a species, nor a group of species,nor is there a WikiProject covering sheep to refer to, so basically it's not covered. It could be changed at any stage anyway if there is a consensus for either form of capitailization. Regards, SunCreator ^(talk) 14:10, 23 October 2011 (UTC)

Well, in the absence of a definitive convention for the capitalization of sheep breeds, and Hog Island Sheep being not a species but a breed, it seems to me that we would follow whatever convention could be found to emerge from the common usage of breed names; in the absence of that, I would simply say that as both words of Hog Island are capitalized, I would find it more æsthetically agreeable to capitalize Sheep as well, making it look more consistent or visually consonant. I am, however, biased as Hog Island Sheep is the article on which I began working—though my efforts thus far have been no more than a drop in what I hope shall become quite a large bucket. Der Elbenkoenig (talk) 16:47, 23 October 2011 (UTC)

The most closely related Featured Articles about agricultural animal breeds are of horse breeds, and all have "horse" not capitalized. Der Elbenkoenig (talk) 21:27, 23 October 2011 (UTC)

What are your thought on merging one of the articles to the other? Regards, SunCreator ^(talk) 21:53, 23 October 2011 (UTC)

The horse articles I saw make me think that Hog Island Sheep should be merged into Hog Island sheep. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Der Elbenkoenig (talk • contribs) 00:39, 24 October 2011 (UTC)

Template/Format

As it appears to me that there are no existing Featured articles on sheep breeds, the next best thing (FAs on breeds of agricultural/related animals) I could find was horse breed FAs: Andalusian horse, Icelandic horse, and Marwari horse. From these I gleaned the section headings "breed characteristics", "history", and "uses" (though the horse breed articles to not all uniformly use these).

These articles also help to answer the question of case (Hog Island Sheep vs. Hog Island sheep) as the horse articles are all titled in sentence case, with horse non-capitalized. Der Elbenkoenig (talk) 21:02, 23 October 2011 (UTC)

No sheep breed, but Sheep is a featured article. Regards, SunCreator ^(talk) 21:49, 23 October 2011 (UTC)

Some good articles on sheep breeds. Jacob (sheep), Herdwick. The Jacob article makes me wonder if the breed is called Hog Island rather then Hog Island sheep and thus the article would be Hog Island (sheep)? Regards, SunCreator ^(talk) 22:02, 23 October 2011 (UTC)

The sources I've seen refer to the breed as the Hog Island sheep, named for the location of Hog Island, Virginia. I was looking at the horse articles because unlike Sheep, they are articles on specific breeds of domesticated animals. I will look at the sheep breed GAs for further ideas on how to build the article. Der Elbenkoenig (talk) 00:42, 24 October 2011 (UTC)

The name is definitly Hog Island sheep, not just hog island. So the article should be titled Hog Island sheep. I have no preference on whether the s in sheep is capatalized or not.Beefcake6412 (talk) 18:43, 25 October 2011 (UTC)

(undent) As I posted on Steven Walling's page, I'm definitely willing to help as well, if you need an extra set of eyes. I did a large portion of the work on the horse breed articles mentioned above, so have a bit of experience with breed GAs/FAs. There have been several GA/FA articles on horse breeds with feral populations that might make good templates for this article. See Banker horse (written by a classmate of yours from a couple of years ago, I believe), Carolina Marsh Tacky, Kaimanawa horse, Chincoteague Pony and Eriskay Pony. For another livestock breed FA, see Aylesbury duck, although that article places a lot of focus on the industrial/farming aspects of the duck, which I don't think you'll find the sourcing for with this breed. Other poultry GAs include Buckeye (chicken), Sebright (chicken) and Silkie. Check through these (and the other sheep and horse articles mentioned above) for ideas on sectioning, formatting, references, etc. More thoughts later on potential references. Dana boomer (talk) 20:33, 27 October 2011 (UTC)

Thanks. It seems that the sections that always pop up on those are History and Characteristics, which I've started; The remaining sections I think would end up being one about conservation efforts/research/human intervention and perhaps their uses (which is more or less the opposite of conservation). Are there any other categories of knowledge that might be specific to a feral sheep that I haven't thought of? Der Elbenkoenig (talk) 15:01, 2 November 2011 (UTC)

A conservation section is a good idea with a breed like this that has had a lot of conservation work done. See Carolina Marsh Tacky for an example of an article with this section. A uses section is also good, as long as there is enough information to make a solid section. Otherwise, if there are just a couple of sentences, it might be better to add it into either the history or characteristics section (wherever it fits better), as is done in a lot of the smaller breed GAs. I can't think of anything else at the moment. Sometimes things evolve as more source material is found, though! Dana boomer (talk) 17:27, 2 November 2011 (UTC)

National Animal Germplasm Program

NAGP does not have its own article, but it does have a section within the article of the American Livestock Breeds Conservancy, so when I wrote the bit mentioning it I linked to that section. I had considered redlinking it, but I reasoned that since it was a program that was a part of the operation of the ALBC, it made sense that it didn't need its own article (there isn't likely much to say about it other than they collect animal sperm for posterity) and therefore doesn't need to be redlinked. Is there some sort of policy/rule of thumb regarding topics that should be linked, but don't have existing articles? I think for readers of this article, the link should be there so people can get a quick look-over of that the NAGP is and then come back to Hog Island sheep. Am I wrong? Der Elbenkoenig (talk) 02:55, 16 November 2011 (UTC)

Wait, my understanding is that the NAGP is a USDA program, not a part of the ALBC? I think that would mean it's pretty notable, and it would be confusing to link to a section of the ALBC article. In any case, redlinks are desirable for notable subjects, because we want people to realize Wikipedia is incomplete and needs their help to be comprehensive. It's the wiki way. Steven Walling • talk 05:49, 16 November 2011 (UTC)

Yeah, the NAGP is a USDA program (see the main page here), they just do a lot of work in conjunction with the ALBC. I agree with Steven that linking the ALBC article would be confusing... At some point, an article needs to be created for the NAGP, but for now a red link is fine. Dana boomer (talk) 12:18, 16 November 2011 (UTC)

My mistake, The NAGP is indeed a USDA program and is reasonably deserving of its own article. However, my biology teacher doesn't think redlinks are good to have in articles, so I suppose I'll create the article. Would it be appropriate to create the article as a stub with just a couple of sentences (citing a reliable source, of course)? Der Elbenkoenig (talk) 16:08, 21 November 2011 (UTC)

Teacher Review

• Hog Island sheep are a breed of sheep that was developed from feral animals on Virginia's Hog Island beginning in the 17th century. I'm unclear on whether the breed specifically arose in the 1600's from pre-existing feral sheep or whether the breed is the outcome of natural selection after they were abandoned in the 30's and 40's?

The latter, if I have read the resources correctly. I did try to clarify. Der Elbenkoenig (talk) 04:50, 3 December 2011 (UTC)

Actually, the answer seems to be both: there were feral sheep from Shipwrecks in the area, these sheep were used by the Hog Islanders, and then they were left behind and became feral again. The breed seems to be what we call them now, not what they were at the time. I would think "Hog Island sheep" are sheep that are descended from the sheep on Hog Island. Der Elbenkoenig (talk) 16:31, 6 December 2011 (UTC)

• The Hog Island sheep is a feral breed, descended from sheep that were abandoned on Hog Island in the 1930s and 1940s. Are they presently feral? Is feral a term that describes a breed or is it the conditions in which they live? A hog island sheep kept on a farm - is it a feral breed?
• It is believed that the breed was descended from the Merino breed, among others. I would elaborate on the Merino breed so that a reader has some insights into what they are. Its a very short article, a little expansion would not hurt. Also "among others" - do they not rate mentioning?

One source said the sheep were "probably Spanish Merinos", another that they "had a lot of Merino blood"... I tried to reconcile the two. Should I just say that the original sheep were Merino? Der Elbenkoenig (talk) 15:00, 6 December 2011 (UTC)

• ... are considered important for preservation because of their historical significance and because of the traits they have that modern sheep might lack..., Other than being abandoned by their owners - to fend for themselves, did they play any role in history. I keep waiting for a historical moment. Do they represent the phenotypic characteristics of sheep during that time? If so, what are the specifics.

As far as I know, they are similar to sheep of that time, which is why they are used in exhibits... I think the similarities are their small size and the texture of their wool, but I'm not quite positive about that and I'd have to find a RS or re-read one of my references. Der Elbenkoenig (talk) 04:50, 3 December 2011 (UTC)

• ...like their hardiness and reproductive efficiency. In what way are the hardy - cold tolerant - heat tolerant - need little food - without natural predators or parasites to place selective pressures, its seems that they would be less "hardy". Reproductive efficiency... copulate in 15 seconds are less - extra large broods - low infant mortality rate --- what makes them efficient?

The Swiss Village Foundation article on the sheep mentions "Easy lambing", which I don't really understand the concept of myself. Der Elbenkoenig (talk) 04:50, 3 December 2011 (UTC)

Hardiness generally means an ability for the breed to still be productive in bad weather, on less than perfect grazing et cetera. Easy lambing means low infant mortality and less need for shepherds to assist in birthing twins and so on. Steven Walling • talk 05:34, 10 December 2011 (UTC)

• so the livestock were left to roam free and were rounded up only to be marked or used for meat or wool. In 1933, a hurricane destroyed most of Hog Island, and with the inhabitants abandoning the settled areas, many sheep were left to fend for themselves and reverted to a feral state. It seems as if they were feral prior to being abandoned. At what point were they domesticated?

I got the impression that they were domesticated, but they didn't need fences/pens/folds or whatever one generally keeps sheep in, but they were still somewhat cared for and/or taken advantage of agriculturally, and they had also been bred to maximize usefulness, I think... Der Elbenkoenig (talk) 04:50, 3 December 2011 (UTC)

Yes, they were always domesticated until the island was abandoned, but in that kind of environment it is quite common for sheep to be just left free to roam without care until they are rounded up. They do the same thing still today in some places. Steven Walling • talk 05:37, 10 December 2011 (UTC)

• In the 1970s, The Nature Conservancy bought the island, rounded up the sheep and removed them.. Where did they take them - were they destroyed. If they were removed - how were they later "rediscovered"?
• When the population was discovered on the island,... When were they discovered, after 1970? Was there a point in this timeline that they were lost from history?
• ... to determine why they were relatively free of parasites. Would this be internal parasites or external, such as ticks and fleas. I'm having troubling accepting the idea of a coastal island being free of parasites.
• when it was discovered that they were not resistant to parasites but simply isolated from them by island life, they were sent to institutions ... This may be a cause effect problem. Were they sent to this institutions because thy are not unique in their resistance to parasites. Should these two concepts be blended as if one aspect dictated the other?

I think they found the sheep not resistant to parasites and therefore couldn't somehow use that trait to the advantage of agriculture, and they sent the sheep to the historical places (museums?) just because they were done with them. I don't know if they would have kept them for more research if they had had some trait that made them parasite-resistant.

Letting animals roam free + presence of parasites = in-grown resistance. Since feral sheep not as resistant to parasites would either die, not grow as quickly, and not reproduce as well, the pressures of natural selection mean that once feral breeds usually have higher parasite resistance. Steven Walling • talk 05:50, 10 December 2011 (UTC)

• producing nearly pure Hog Island sheep with some advantageous genes added ... No one is concerned over such hybridization?

The resulting sheep are as Hog-Islandy as possible, with the hybridization necessary for the sheep's health, I believe Der Elbenkoenig (talk) 04:50, 3 December 2011 (UTC)

I see nothing concerning grammar and prose of concern - keeping in mind my skills are limited. My concern is whether it reflects an in-dept coverage of the subject. I was left with more questions than answers. The information may not be out there; it is an obscure topic. However, see if you can address my concerns; if I'm not clear - then see me in the 'real world'.--JimmyButler (talk) 20:20, 29 November 2011 (UTC)

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Hog Island sheep/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Sven Manguard (talk · contribs) 14:39, 13 December 2011 (UTC)

GAN Quicksheet 1.1 SM

1. Well written:

a. prose/copyright: Needs work

- I will preform a light copyedit personally, once you've addressed the other issues.

- You use the descriptives "hardiness" and "tough and hardy". I believe that this needs to be defined a bit, or put into context somehow. As someone who dosen't know a terrible amount about sheep, these terms were pretty much the only things I didn't understand.

There is an explanation of this where Mr Butler brought up this same problem. That can be used to expand the text somewhat. --Ettrig (talk) 17:32, 13 December 2011 (UTC)

The sheep are good at foraging, and apparently require little food (relative to other sheep, I suppose), but other than that the sources I have read simply describe the sheep as "hardy". Der Elbenkoenig (talk) 15:52, 15 December 2011 (UTC)

- I run GA candidates through CorenSearchBot's manual search. This came up clean.

b. MoS compliance: Acceptable

- There is information contained in the lead that is not contained in the main body of the article, specifically the information about the storm conditions causing the humans to leave, abandoning the sheep. Please make sure a few sentences on this are put into the main body text.

Under History, it is written: In 1933, a hurricane destroyed most of Hog Island, and with the inhabitants abandoning the settled areas.... I think that refers to the storm conditions mentioned in the lead. Der Elbenkoenig (talk) 02:36, 14 December 2011 (UTC)

So it is. My bad. Sven Manguard Wha? 03:13, 16 December 2011 (UTC)

- It is not necessary to use citations in the lead, since all of the cited information with the exception of the storm point raised above is also in the main body, cited with the same sources. However you don't have to remove the citations if you don't want to. It's fine either way.

2. Accurate and verifiable: Section acceptable

a. provides references: Acceptable

b. proper citation use: Acceptable

c. no original research: Acceptable

3. Broad in coverage:

a. covers main aspects: Needs work

- ... I think. It's not missing anything that my random spotcheck of other sheep breeds had, at least. The article is awfully small, although there's no size requirement built into GA.

- Concerns raised by the peer review that need to be addressed:

• You mention that "other breeds...are more suited to modern agricultural techniques". You might elaborate on this. What exactly makes other breeds more suitable? Done
• The problems of inbreeding could be explained in greater detail. Since the Hog Island Sheep have been distributed to several locations, the 200 animals are not living together. Are the separate batches (or individual sheep) transported from one place to another for breeding? Is the captured semen shared among the subflocks? What other sheep breeds have been mixed with the Hog Island sheep? What specific inbreeding problems arise in sheep?
• Should the Hog Island Sheep Association be mentioned in the article? Is it important enough to deserve a paragraph?

I tried to look into it. The "Hog Island Sheep Association" appears to be nothing more than a website run by the "Fingerlakes Woolen Mill". I really don't think the HISA is really much of an organization that's done anything; the only real work related to the sheep has ben done by the ALBC and USDA. Do you agree? Der Elbenkoenig (talk) 15:15, 23 December 2011 (UTC)

• Where exactly are the 200 sheep? Is it possible to give the sizes and locations of the subflocks?

- Additional concerns:

• at the very bottom: '...producing almost pure Hog Island sheep except for the addition of some advantageous genes' - define "addition of some advantageous genes"; what is added, if anything, other than genetic diversity? Done
• regarding the parasites questions that your teacher left in the teacher review: I wasn't going to make an issue of it before, because you presented a complete and cogent statement on the issue, however if you are able to do anything further to improve that area (especially on the 'are they internal or external parasites' question) that would be good.

b. focused/on topic: Acceptable

4. Neutral: Section acceptable

5. Stable: Section acceptable

6. Image use: Section acceptable

a. license/tagging correct: Acceptable

b. relevant/properly captioned: Acceptable

7. Additional items not required for a GA, but requested by the reviewer: Section acceptable

a. images have alt texts: Acceptable

- I expanded the alt texts myself. Alt texts should be descriptive, rather than just repeating the name of the breed or saying 'black sheep'.

b. article is suitable for solid copy export: Acceptable

c. catch all general aesthetics: Acceptable

8. Other concerns Needs work

- The Mount Vernon external link does not appear to be functioning, it redirects to the main page when clicked. See the toolserver readout for details. If you can find the new permanent address for the page you're trying to link to, please do. If not, please remove the external link.

Fixed. Der Elbenkoenig (talk) 15:53, 15 December 2011 (UTC)

- Is it typical to have History below Characteristics?

It is very untypical. I think it is good. --Ettrig (talk) 17:32, 13 December 2011 (UTC)

This is very close now. Congratulations! --Ettrig (talk) 17:32, 13 December 2011 (UTC)

-I will preform the copyedit and do the last round of checking this coming weekend, or right after it (unless someone beats me to the copyedit). Sven Manguard Wha? 03:13, 16 December 2011 (UTC)

I think "Research and conservation (after rediscovery)" is an awkward section heading. Regards, SunCreator ^(talk) 06:30, 16 December 2011 (UTC)

I agree, and that was one of the things I intended on changing during the CE. Most of the rest of the issues were minor grammatical things though, which is why I didn't ask for someone from the GOCE to come in and do major work. Sven Manguard Wha? 07:32, 17 December 2011 (UTC)

Right then, I'm sorry to double back on this, but I missed the peer review the first time around, thinking that the teacher review and the peer review were the same thing. The peer review listed some things that still need addressing. I put them in section 3a, which means that unfortunately I doubled back on the 'Acceptable' rating for that section.

On the plus side, you and Malleus have done an excellent job polishing the article up, and none of these new items are any more time intensive as the things you two have already handled over the past two days. I don't see any real reason why this wouldn't make GA well in time for the end of your project, which I believe is just under a month away. Sven Manguard Wha? 07:29, 18 December 2011 (UTC)

Keep up the good work! Sven Manguard Wha? 03:47, 23 December 2011 (UTC)

PROMOTED - Okay, I've looks this over once more and decided that it warrants being passed. The only things that never got completed from this GAN review were the logistical question of breeding between subflocks, and a clarification of what type of parasite the study was looking at. These are minor things. If you intend on taking this to FA, you'll probably need to expand the article and incorporate those pieces of information, but I couldn't find them myself and they aren't major things. On a personal note, I know that this GAN review was a bit of a mess, and I'm sorry for that. Finally, I encourage you to keep up with editing Wikipedia after your course is over, you've got the skill for it. Sven Manguard Wha? 13:46, 7 January 2012 (UTC)

Thanks. Wikipedia is awesome. Der Elbenkoenig (talk) 03:44, 9 January 2012 (UTC)