Template talk:Horse breeds of Germany

Source

Would love to know the source for the redlinked breeds, perhaps we can get started on some article about them. Montanabw^(talk) 20:10, 12 February 2013 (UTC)

We can keep discussion of this template here instead of at our talk pages. I am pretty sure that the "German Classic Pony" must be the same as the "German Riding Pony" - which is "Deutsches Reitpony" in de. wiki. As for the others, I'm concerned that we don't duplicate existing articles -- what sources are in the de.wiki that these are breeds? One wiki can't be a source for another wiki, we require outside third party sources... Montanabw^(talk) 23:20, 12 February 2013 (UTC)

More sourcing: http://www.pferdemuseum.de/en/exhibition/permanent-exhibition/

Recent edits

Discussion consolidated at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Agriculture#Breed navboxes. Montanabw^(talk) 18:41, 12 February 2014 (UTC)

Comment, thought

Wondering if the alt names for some of these breeds should be included in the template, such as Oberlander for the Rhenish-German Coldblood, possibly PInzgauer for Noriker (though technically I guess the Noriker is Austrian...Hmmm. well, anyway). If we have redirects on all of these so they aren't redlinks, and we have them watchlisted, that should minimize the potential for articles to be created by someone who thinks they are missing... also think we may want to be sure to add these alt names to the List of horse breeds with annotation such as Foo horse see Foobar horse. My old cleanup now needs cleanup as wiki improves, but I remember back in 2006 and 2007 when I was doing stuff like finding three different (and all very poor) articles on, say, the Pottock... Just a thought. Montanabw^(talk) 17:39, 6 November 2014 (UTC)

Yes, I thought about that. The Noriker is, as you say, not German :). I wouldn't mind if Oberländer was put back, though if you are going to start adding every name that every one of these breeds has ever been known by in the past this is going to get very large (see, e.g., the altnames for the Rhenish German Coldblood). I think the same probably applies to the list of horse breeds, that a choice has to be made between completeness and accessibility. In my view the place to do a lot of that "for foohorse see Foo Horse" stuff is in the List of German horse breeds, which doesn't have constraints of space. In this navbox, I'm in two minds whether it's better for, say, Rottaler to redirect or to be kept as a red link - which might stimulate someone to create an article.

Looking further up the page, the Deutsches Classic Pony is not the same as the Deutsches Reitpony; the red-linked breeds (like the blue-linked ones ...) are referenced in the list of German breeds. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 19:24, 6 November 2014 (UTC)

My thinking is mostly pragmatic: If it's listed in Hendricks, or on Dreamhorse.com, then some idiot (or breeder) is apt to want to create the article, so I'm all for a preemptive strike. The List gets a lot of traffic, while the navboxes are mostly viewed once you get to one of the articles. I'm willing to do the heavy lifting of maintaining thelist, but it's helpful if others ping thelist when redirects and such occur. Montanabw^(talk) 02:24, 8 November 2014 (UTC)

Recent edits

I've removed the following from the navbox:

• a category, because it is not an article, per WP:NAVBOX
• three articles only loosely related to the topic of 'horse breeds of Germany', per the same
• a separate section for the Emscherbrücher, per Occam's razor.

Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 10:08, 15 October 2024 (UTC)

WP:NAVBOX says no such thing. You have pointed out no prohibitions to linking to a category in a navbox, nor have I found any. Not even in WP:Navigation template. Categories in the footer of naxboxes are quite common.

The three articles (Horses in Germany, German warmblood, Heavy warmblood) are clearly about German horse breeds and belong in this navbox. They are not "loosely related" to "Horse breeds of Germany". They are, however, overlapping, and maybe could be modified with merging or other editing. But as they sit, they all cover "Horse breeds of Germany".

Using a wikilink to Occam's razor does not explain your action or rationale at all. Occam's razor is not a Wikipedia guideline so I'm not mandated to read it, and I'm not going to read a 6,000+ word article just to try to begin to guess what your point (which you didn't state) was supposed to indicate. Use words to explain; not abstract hints.

Adding one: Changing the footer to List of horse breeds, as you did, violates WP:BIDIRECTIONAL. In fact, you have placed that code in all of your "OWNed" horse-breed-by-country navboxes, whereas none of those navboxes are placed at the bottom of List of horse breeds.   ▶ I am Grorp ◀ 06:19, 17 October 2024 (UTC) And this final one was pointed out to you in great detail ten years ago [1] and your refusal to listen to community consensus then on the subject of BIDIRECTIONAL is still in play today.   ▶ I am Grorp ◀ 06:35, 17 October 2024 (UTC)