Jump to content

Talk:Boerboel

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by William Harris (talk | contribs) at 10:24, 8 October 2020 (→Legislation). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Fresh start

Good idea Samir?

To be honest I thought the entry was fine until Van Tucky got involved. It is a bit of a mess now, but all is not lost. I have had no time to contribute for personal and time reasons, but honestly now it seems it will involve too much of that time to contribute effectively, i.e. turn it back into a credible entry, more time than I have to spare. Perhaps it is best left as an imperfect thing.

But for what its worth: The word Boel, The phrase, Boel is not a problem but to be accurate it means the following. This is "bully" in its original English adjectival sense of "fine, excellent," itself from the Dutch "boel," meaning "brother, friend, good fellow" , Afrikaans in the main being derived from Dutch, and us Afrikaaners that gave you this breed of dog, it simply means "farmers best friend" , Boerboel, no more no less.

Hope that helps some Frikkers


Okay I'd like to go over issues with everyone one paragraph at a time. I've protected the page again in the interim. I understand that VanTucky has asked for an RfC, which is a good idea. -- Samir 04:10, 21 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

RFC response

Howdy! I've come here in response to the RfC - yet I don't see a question directly posed for RfC'ers to respond to. The debate appears to be about how the intro to the article should read, in which case, my only comment at this time is that we should avoid circular references. As such, the use of boer in the explanation of boerboel without defining 'boer' means that the reader likely still doesn't know what it means. It seems that Samir has a suggestion that might address this and other issues, so I would encourage parties to work towards a common solution using his starting point. Have fun! —Mrand T-C 18:06, 21 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The RFC was for a general edit war going on over several issues in the article, including the above intro, images, external links, and the content of the infobox. I urge all responders to stick around and help reach a consensus on all the issues as we go through them, since the fundamental impetus for the continuation of the dispute was a lack of outside participation in the article. VanTucky Talk 18:30, 21 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Introduction

  • Let's start with the introduction. VanTucky suggests the following:
The Boerboel is a large working molosser-type breed of dog from South Africa. The word boerboel is Afrikaans for "Boer's dog". The Boerboel was developed as a guard dog,[1]and retains strong protective instincts. It is intelligent, dominant and confident by nature.
  • Frikkers suggests the following:
The Boerboel is a large working molosser type breed of dog from South Africa. The word boerboel is Afrikaans for "farmer's dog".
"They are obedient, intelligent, self-assured and bred to have an extremely strong guard-dog instinct in a domestic situation. A natural and selective practical breeding ethic has created a very functional working dog, that is very dominant but thrives best in a responsible family environment with correct and careful training where he can put his natural protective instincts into action when required."
  • The last is a direct quote from http://www.boerboelclub.co.uk. Let us work for a compromise between these two. First question: is Boerboel Afrikaans for "farmer's dog" or "Boer's dog"? Any references? -- Samir 04:15, 21 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Okay, no response yet from Frikkers, so we shall move on: The lead should be longer, but I am in agreement that we can create a GFDL-friendly intro without having to directly quote anyone. I also think that the focus of the article should be "The boerboel is..." as opposed to "The boerboel should be...", which connotes a breeder's POV. Finally, I think that we can safely omit references in the lead for now, as long as the same statements are referenced in the body of the article (unless especially controversial; see WP:LEAD).
  • VanTucky and Frikkers, what are key points in the body of the article (origin, appearance, registration, characteristics/temperament) that should be in the lead? My amateurish version would be something like this:
The Boerboel is a large working molosser-type breed of dog from South Africa. The word "boerboel" derives from "boer", the Afrikaans word for "farmer"; boerboel thus translates as either "farmer's dog" or "Boer's dog" in Afrikaans. There is a lengthy history of breeding the boerboel in South Africa, where the dog was bred with the purpose of defending the homestead. While it is uncertain from which breeds the dog was originally bred from, it is postulated that the dog derived from interbreeding of indigenous African species with breeds brought from Dutch, French and British settlers. The dog is a heavily built mastiff breed with characteristic facies and a large-for-proportions head, and a height that varies from 64 to 70 centimetres for males, and 59 to 65 centimetres for females. They are obedient and intelligent, and have strong guard-dog instincts, particularly in domestic situations. By nature, the Boerboel is confident and dominant in its environment, but requires human companionship; if left alone for regular extended periods, they can become destructive, reckless and dangerous.

I agree with your general estimations above, here is my version of the intro above (I like the basic format of it mostly).

The Boerboel is a large working molosser breed of dog from South Africa. The word "boerboel" derives from "boer", the Afrikaans word for "farmer"; boerboel thus translates as either "farmer's dog" or "Boer's dog" in Afrikaans. There is a lengthy history of breeding the boerboel in South Africa, where the dog was bred with the purpose of guarding the homestead. While it is uncertain from which breeds the dog originated, it is postulated that the dog derived from interbreeding of indigenous African species with breeds brought from Dutch, French and British settlers. The dog is a heavy mastiff breed with a characteristic black and tan coloration, and a height that varies from 64-70 centimetres for males, and 59-65 for females. They are obedient and intelligent, and have strong territorial instincts, particularly in domestic situations. By nature, the Boerboel is confident and dominant in its environment, but requires human companionship; if left alone for regular extended periods, they can become destructive, reckless and dangerous.

How does that look? VanTucky Talk 22:44, 23 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Looks like a good summary to me -- Samir 00:20, 25 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Small point, but you need to disambiguate either to [[Netherlands|Dutch]], [[France|French]] and [[UK|British]], or to [[Dutch people|Dutch]], [[French people|French]], [[British people|British]]. The choice is yours - both ways are OK, IMO. HeartofaDog (talk • contribs) 10:08, 29 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

References

  1. ^ South African Boerboel Breeders Association (SABBA), home page. Retrieved August 21, 2007

Picture

Okay, we've given it some time on the lead, and Frikkers has been invited to participate in this discussion, but has not. Regardless, let's move on to the next point of contention, which is the picture for the infobox. VanTucky suggests Image:Hunt Hill Boerboels Male.jpg and Frikkers suggests Image:HuntHillBoerboelGunston-6.jpeg. Both are free use. I've placed them below:

  • Comments? -- Samir 04:49, 29 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • My objection to the original image (the one at right here) is that is of very poor exposure and definition, as well as having an unsightly colored border. It is simply too substandard an image to use in the lead. From Frikkers previous talk arguments, it is my summary that he felt the image I switched to (at left here) was unsuitable only because it was a dog that did not exemplify the breed standard (I think the comment was: the dog has weak hindquarters). I tried to explain that favoring an image based on an arbitrary breed standard, rather than how well it illustrates the subject, is a violation of NPOV. There are many conflicting standards for breeds, and there is considerable debate among boerboel enthusiasts over the ideal appearance of the breed. There are multiple boerboel associations, each with their own standard. Even if we were to consider this factor, as sometimes happens in breed articles where the standard is, well, fairly standard in acceptance and usage, the first priority is simple photographic quality. As you can also see in the Commons gallery and previous talk, I have tried to suggest over images I found on Flickr, but these were rejected. VanTucky Talk 06:53, 29 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

RfC response

I agree with VanTucky's argument that the picture does not have of a show quality dog, but to be honest, I don't care for either picture. While the picture that we display on the page most certainly doesn't have to be perfect, the one on the left has many shadows which masks coloring and the dog is turned strangely. As VanTucky mentions, the one on the right is lacking in overall quality and I'd add that it doesn't have a high res version available. If push came to shove, I'd probably use the one on the left for the moment, with the intent on finding another one.—Mrand T-C 11:31, 2 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]


Good point Mrand.....only there is no such thing as a "show Boerboel", showing in the sense of dog beauty pageant is not done with the Boerboel. The picture on the right is a good picture with just fine quality. However this picture has never been an issue for anyone on any edits???? See edit history, just Van Tucky again???

Frikkers —Preceding unsigned comment added by 220.246.52.34 (talk) 04:54, 3 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Obviously, per the statements by Mrand, I am not the only who recognizes that the image on the right is unsuitable. VanTucky Talk 02:55, 6 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Picture break

Image:Boerboel.jpg

Disengaging

The article's now been unprotected and I think we've made a good start toward consensus. Let us consider this to be a consensus version up to now, and I will disengage from the process. Hopefully the editors of this page will be able to work through improving the article even further. Cheers -- Samir 03:43, 6 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Further disruption

I've issued Frikkers (talk · contribs) 4th block following this further image switching against above discussion/consensus, removal of interwikilinks and adding of mispellings. Could other editors look please at some of the addition external links provided in Frikkers' edit to see if any of these were useful.

I've done a little copyediting and sorted out the manually applied numbered references which had no corresponding links in the article itself. David Ruben Talk 02:13, 3 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Citations

Wow this page has recieved alot of attention and seems to have a few active contributors to it. If you are going to put this much effort into maintaining it and have already reached a concensus on the page you want, then you people should have some citations so it becomes a better wikipedia article. TeePee-20.7 (talk) 04:39, 1 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

"Dubious--discuss"

Would whoever placed this tag next to the weight range please explain why so something can be done about it? Exploding Boy (talk) 06:26, 26 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Boerboel is like one person with a gun he protect the family and he like kids —Preceding unsigned comment added by 41.215.212.83 (talk) 16:01, 8 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

"somewhat improved"

agree with the comments on weight. - also far too wide a spread in my view. Generally acknowlegded weight are from 130lbs to 200lbs but haven't found any reliable sources for this. article still looks much improved from my last view. the references to kids feet being chewed off should be removed ... sensationalist and not reflective of the breed in generalSimonjonesmjb (talk) 05:34, 11 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

never heard of black being acceptable in the breed standardSimonjonesmjb (talk) 05:36, 11 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

--Ron da mon (talk) 17:11, 2 December 2009 (UTC) Agreeing on the article link removal, mentioned above. Every large dog has some tragic story attached, and highlighting that in the Wiki for one breed in particular is somewhat odd.[reply]

The aspect of this dog is very similar to the Fila Brasileiro

The aspect of this South African dog is very similar to the Fila Brasileiro. Both are guard dogs and in similar places in terms of level of life.Agre22 (talk) 14:39, 4 January 2010 (UTC)agre22[reply]

I don't think you need...

You don't need to have every requirement of breed's standard in the wiki article. Most people don't care about their dog's "zygomatic arch" unless it's really messed up, and the few that do care would have to figure out what it is and then how to measure it. You don't need this stuff in the article: "roof of the cranium", "parallel plane with the cranial roof", "It is well protected against the environment by firm and black-pigmented eyelids, showing no structural weaknesses", "", "", ""

Some of it should definitely stay, like: "The head is impressive and a distinctive feature of the Boerboel. It is blocky, broad, deep, fairly short and in proportion to the body. It is muscular with well-filled cheeks." Just put it in normal paragraph form.


Having all that technical info is unnecessary and distracts from the beauty of the breed. It's a huge awkward space in the middle of the article.

Gatorgirl7563 (talk) 18:17, 5 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

How do you like Wiki Boerboel's new look? Comments? Questions? Criticisms?

Gatorgirl7563 (talk) 17:13, 14 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Requirements

I believe this section doesn't comply with writing guidelines. --176.199.192.165 (talk) 22:00, 26 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Boerboel. 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:

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) 22:37, 22 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Dubious - ability to kill leopards?

This dubious claim is referenced to the "1971" volume - can anyone identify which Volume Number of the encyclopedia this claim relates to, so that it might be verified? William Harristalk 09:33, 16 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Dubious text removed. William Harristalk 21:55, 22 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Legislation

Hello User:Jln115, as per my message on your talk page, you claim that the SABBS is the only organisation authorised in terms of the SA Animal Improvement Act, No. 62 of 1998 (AIA) to officially register Boerboels, and that the Boerboel is declared a landrace under act 62 of 1998. Here it is here, please direct me to the paragraph(s) that states this. William Harris (talk) 08:25, 8 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

See: https://www.gov.za/sites/default/files/gcis_document/201411/38188gen980.pdf Jln115 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 08:33, 8 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

OK, that confirms that the SABBS is registered as an "ANIMAL BREEDERS' SOCIETY" under the Act, which gives it certain rights and obligations. What about "the Boerboel is declared a landrace" under the Act? William Harris (talk) 08:40, 8 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I found it myself: Definitions: (xxiii) ‘‘landrace’’ means a specified breed of a kind of animal indigenous to or developed in the Republic. Based on this narrow definition given in the Act, the Boerboel would be considered a landrace FOR THE PURPOSES OF THIS ACT in South Africa. Whether it will be considered a landrace for the purposes of Wikipedia has yet to be decided.
Also on your talk page, please refer to the Wikipedia policy about using WP:RELIABLE sources which are WP:INDEPENDENT of the subject. Breed clubs and breeder associations are not independent of this subject. They are good for producing breed standards and the histories of their own organisations. They are not reliable for history or purported abilities of dogs. William Harris (talk) 08:47, 8 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I find it ironic that you may edit and remove information wrt to the Boerboel as you please without providing any proof/citations and without repercussion yet you expect me to provide proof(which I have) when I correct your un-cited edits.The Boerboel is a declared landrace under act 62 0f 1998 See attached page 22: http://www.gsdfmembers.co.za/_pdf/List%20of%20Dogs%20declared%20-%20animal-improvement-act-62-1998.pdf Jln115 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 09:06, 8 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

(edit conflict) Hello Jln115 (talk · contribs), the breed does not meet the generally used definition of the word landrace and such that definition should be removed. Further:
  1. the KUSA breed standard belongs in the infobox, as the infobox clearly says kennel club, not breed club
  2. the breed club information does not belong in the lead, if anywhere it belongs in the body of the article
  3. the breed club is an inappropriate source for the claims about its legal status, the link you have provided above is more suitable
I will be amending some of your additions in accordance with the, please don’t revert, if you do we will be forced to take alternative measures that may see you banned from contributing to the page. Cavalryman (talk) 09:08, 8 October 2020 (UTC).[reply]
The Kennel Union of South Africa is a registering authority: https://www.gov.za/sites/default/files/gcis_document/201710/41178gon1098.pdf and SABBS is a breeders society (which can keep a register). This is why we seek WP:INDEPENDENT sources. William Harris (talk) 09:12, 8 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Cavalryman (talk · contribs) The SABBS is not a Breed club it's a registered animal breeders society (registration Number 62/98/B-68) who are the only organisation authorised in terms of the SA Animal Improvement Act, No. 62 of 1998 (AIA) to officially register Boerboels, breeders may choose to register their Boerboels with KUSA however unless they are also registered with the SABBS they may not legally be called, sold or bred as Boerboels. Secondly the document provided clearly states that the Boerboel is a declared landrace under act 62 0f 1998, Im not going to debate whether or not the Boerboel meets your personal definition of a landrace, the fact is it is officially a declared South African landrace and thus it should be included as such on the page. Lastly I don't take kindly to be threatened, I will take this matter further if it cannot be resolved. Jln115 (talk)

Cavalryman (talk · contribs) as per act 62 of 1998: ‘‘animal breeders’ society’’ means a group of persons promoting the breeding, the recording or registration, the genetic improvement and the use of a kind of animal or an animal of a specified breed of such kind of animal, determining and applying breed standards, recommending in its sole discretion the recording or registration of an animal or a specified breed of a kind of animal bred in or imported into the Republic, and who is registered in terms of section 8(7)(a)(i); (vi) Jln115 (talk)

William Harris (talk · contribs) I stated that SABBS the only organisation that can officially register the Boerboel under act 62 0f 1998 AIA, I did not one claim its the only organisation that may register Boerboels. Boerboels registered with other organisation and not by the SABBS will not be recognised under the Act and will legally not be allowed to be marketed, sold or bred under the name "Boerboel" Jln115 (talk)

Well no, a registering authority has far more powers and responsibilities under the Act, and KUSA is a registering authority. Your last sentence is WP:OR - you will need a good reference to support it. William Harris (talk) 09:54, 8 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

William Harris (talk · contribs) Official statement from KUSA: "The Boerboel is now controlled by the newly formed SABBS - South African Boerboel Breeders’ Society established in 2014- which has replaced all the other Clubs. According to the official website the SABBS “is the only organization authorized in terms of the S Animal Improvement Act No 62 of 1998 (AIA) to officially register the Boerboel.” The Kennel Union of SA still recognizes the Boerboels registered on its books and these Boerboel are welcome to enter and compete at any KUSA All Breeds Shows " https://www.kusa.co.za/images/Gallery/MARCH%20NL%20CBC%20for%20pdf%202.pdf Jln115 (talk)

On this matter, you have convinced me with your research. Also note "Further negotiations between the KUSA and SABBS are ongoing at this point in time." This is because KUSA as a registering authority controls the Boerboel stud book - whether these be "legal" or not. William Harris (talk) 10:17, 8 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
On the matter of the breed standard, KUSA must take precedence in the infobox as the recognised kennel club for SA - the template belongs to WPDOGS and that is the requirement - however I think that including the SABBS standard in the Notes section of the infobox would be reasonable, given that it is a legally recognised "Animal Breeder Society". William Harris (talk) 10:22, 8 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Boerboel&oldid=982470285"