Talk:American Landrace

Potential sources

• http://www.ansi.okstate.edu/breeds/swine/americanlandrace/index.htm -- —— Eagle 101 ^{(Need help?)} 06:35, 11 December 2006 (UTC)
• http://www.nationalswine.com/industryreference/indrefswinebrLand.html —— Eagle 101 ^{(Need help?)} 06:37, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

i think this info. is ok please update and add more info —Preceding unsigned comment added by 165.139.144.222 (talk) 12:37, 11 September 2008 (UTC)

Move discussion in progress

There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:Dutch Landrace which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. —RMCD bot 13:45, 15 September 2014 (UTC)

Requested move 10 November 2015

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: moved. This has now been open for a month and, in this case at least, it looks clear there is a big majority in favour of the move. Jenks24 (talk) 13:31, 12 December 2015 (UTC)

---

American Landrace → American Landrace pig – Capitalization corrected. "American Landrace" (with or without the capitalization) has multiple meanings, and we consistently use natural disambiguation when this is the case (or when any other confusion could result). Cf. Landrace pig, Dutch Landrace goat, Swedish Landrace pig, Danish Landrace pig, British Landrace pig, Finnish Landrace goat, Swedish Landrace goat, Danish Landrace goat, Dutch Landrace pig, Danish Landrace sheep, Danish landrace goose, etc. Numerous previous RMs, 2011–2015, have concluded consistently in favor of this kind of rename for ambiguous or potentially ambiguous animal breed names. Other uses of American [L|l]andrace: "American landrace cannabis/marijuana" and "American Landrace Hybrid" strain of cannabis (and more specific phrases like "A rare North American landrace, the Oaxaca Sativa") [1] [2] [3] [4]. "American landrace of hops" [5]. The "American landrace herds" of cattle and their dairy products [6] [7]. "American landraces of maize" [8], etc. Basically, the phrase "American landrace[s]" can apply to any domesticated plant or animal species of which landrace populations exist, in the Americas. While not all of these sources are good enough to write articles with (especially on cannabis), they're all sufficient to establish usage "in the wild" and thus confusability.  — SMcCandlish ☺ ☏ ¢ ≽^ʌⱷ҅_ᴥⱷ^ʌ≼  14:13, 10 November 2015 (UTC) Relisted. Jenks24 (talk) 13:55, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

• Support per nom -- 70.51.44.60 (talk) 08:51, 11 November 2015 (UTC)
• @SMcCandlish: Did you definitely mean American landrace pig as the proposed title? All of these landrace articles appear to capitalsie the L (see e.g. Template:Landrace pig breeds navbox), i.e. I'd assume this article should be American Landrace pig. Jenks24 (talk) 10:00, 18 November 2015 (UTC)
  • No, it was just lack of coffee. :-) I corrected the RM template to use the consistent capitalization.  — SMcCandlish ☺ ☏ ¢ ≽^ʌⱷ҅_ᴥⱷ^ʌ≼  22:35, 27 November 2015 (UTC)
• Oppose, for several reasons:
  • Breed names are capitalised in Wikipedia
  • There's no need for disambiguation because this is the only American Landrace we have an article on; the British Landrace falls into the same case and should be moved back to where it was before the proposer got it moved
  • If there was a need, we'd use ordinary parenthetical disambiguation, as throughout most of Wikipedia, as preferred by the majority of Wikiproject Agriculture editors, and as was used for almost all animal breed articles until the proposer started trying to impose his preferences on the rest of us. That attempt included moving a couple of hundred of them without consensus after he'd been clearly told not to do so, and has since included innumerable tedious and time-wasting move requests. (Note: Jenks24, you were going to move those couple of hundred articles back to their previous titles following this futile discussion, but I think took a break from Wikipedia at about that time). Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 16:52, 18 November 2015 (UTC)
    • Response: @Justlettersandnumbers: "American landrace pig" was a typo; it should of course be "American Landrace pig"; I've corrected the RM to reflect this, so the first of those points is addressed. Re: "no need for disambiguation because this is the only American Landrace we have an article on" – this has come up before in numerous RMs, including on animal breeds, and the consistent consensus has been to use natural disambiguation, when available, if there is a significant chance of user confusion of the article's subject with other actual topics by the same name, even if there is only one extant article right this moment; it's essentially a WP:PRECISION matter. (When there was not consensus to disambiguate, it was because the potential confusion was only theoretical, based on the construction of the name, rather than on other real-world topics with that name.) The purpose of disambiguation of article titles is to avoid reader confusion, not to serve as a between-articles navigation system (disambiguation pages and hatnotes serve a navigational function). As for the third point, the clear wording of WP:AT policy contradicts it: WP:NATURALDIS is preferred when it is practical; WP:PARENDIS isn't the "normal" disambiguation, it's the second choice. It happens to be more common, because most topics cannot reasonably be naturally disambiguated in a way suitable for encyclopedia article titles (e.g. Michael Jackson (writer) cannot be naturally disambiguated except awkwardly and non-WP:CONCISEly, as "Michael Jackson, the writer" or "the writer Michael Jackson". This problem does not arise with a American Landrace → American Landrace pig disambiguation. This has all been covered many times before, and the result has consistently been to disambiguate, naturally. Also, per the WP:AC/DS notice you've received, please do not personalize article title discussions. Months of RMs in which consensus, representing the input of a WP-wide cross-section of editors, favored natural disambiguation, as policy directs us to do, is not one editor "trying to impose his preferences on the rest of us"; that's a bad-faith-assumptive projection. Finally, one wikiproject (which no particular editor was elected to represent) may or may not have an aggregate preference (there is not one expressed at Wikipedia:WikiProject Agriculture/Livestock task force, BTW, and it has a grand total of three participants, including me and not including Justlettersandnumbers; there is also nothing at the parent WP:WikiProject Agriculture). Regardless, the policy-compliant preference for natural disambiguation for animal breed articles was established all the way back in 2011 at Talk:Alentejana cattle#Requested move, before my involvement. Anyway, virtually no articles are solely within the scope of a single project, meanwhile multiple ArbCom rulings have stated explicitly that a single project cannot impose its style or other preferences on other editors, and WP:LOCALCONSENSUS policy was written specifically to curtail attempts to do so.  — SMcCandlish ☺ ☏ ¢ ≽^ʌⱷ҅_ᴥⱷ^ʌ≼  10:13, 19 November 2015 (UTC)
• Support per nom and consistency with previous RMs for similar articles. Tiggerjay (talk) 23:45, 19 November 2015 (UTC)
• Relisting comment. Another admin might arguably close this as moved, but I recall this being a massive headache last year so I'd like to give this another week to make sure of things. Jenks24 (talk) 13:55, 23 November 2015 (UTC)
  • @Jenks24: Good idea. While the "controversy" about this comes across as manufactured/reactionary, and one-editor in nature, it does no harm to extend this RM and increase certainty that moves of this sort are in fact routine at this point. Even last year's RM-after-RM opposition was a three-editor affair, in which one has now reversed their position on this (as directly talk-quoted at the related RM ongoing at Talk:Twentse Landgans, which may also need to be extended for additional comment), and it was a battlegrounding position that second opposer took against their own views to begin with, just for the sake of backing Justlettersandnumbers and the other one against me for personality reasons (To me in 2014: "I am basically siding with people who hold a view opposite from my own preference on titles ... because you re bullying them ... you are rapidly becoming one of the most tendentious and annoying people on wikipedia. That's not an 'attack'" [9]; to Justlettersandnumbers this very month: "I also backed you on your preference for parenthetical naming on the other animal species breed articles, even though I personally didn't care for the style. I think I fought that battle harder than you did, actually" [10]). The third of those parties is no longer an active editor. While this WP:TAGTEAM pattern could have been addressed at ANI or ArbCom, the 2014 dispute is stale, the tagteam has dissolved, I have a measure of peace with that second editor now, and it's far less drama to just let RM settle the matter on the merits.  — SMcCandlish ☺ ☏ ¢ ≽^ʌⱷ҅_ᴥⱷ^ʌ≼  22:35, 27 November 2015 (UTC)
• Support moving serves consistency and precision. Plantdrew (talk) 21:07, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

---

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.

Picture added

I saw this article was in need of an image - I found one in wikimedia commons already, so I have re-used that as-is. This should serve in the interim I imagine!Ablations (talk) 06:41, 23 May 2022 (UTC)