Talk:The Intelligence of Dogs

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

My dog is #2 and my girlfriend's #67. I love this book. -- Toytoy 13:35, Sep 4, 2004 (UTC) It can get pretty subjective and personal("my Hound is stupid?") but, even considering breeding traits, there are just some breeds that exhibit more ability to reason,remember--sort of a brainy energy--than other breeds--sorry.

Contents 1 Criticism not NPOV 2 Doubting veracity 3 Is this purely promotion? 4 Merge with Dog intelligence

[edit] Criticism not NPOV

While dog intelligence as a whole can be disputed, the criticism section for this article needs to be rewritten to cite sources which claim these ideas. —Rob (talk) 17:04, 16 February 2006 (UTC)

I removed the section & merged some of it into dog intelligence. Elf | Talk 17:19, 16 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Doubting veracity

Removed this comment from the article:

Stanley Coren is somewhat infamous for making up some of his "research," particularly in his book/novel THE LEFT-HANDER SYNDROME. Nothing he has to say about dogs should be taken without a large, very large grain of salt.--Lee Charles Kelley 20:48, 5 March 2006 (UTC)

If there's some reliable reference that can be cited to this effect, it's worth a note in the article. Elf | Talk 20:54, 5 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Is this purely promotion?

My problem is that it's not encyclopedic, but just a resume of a book that's on the market. POV all over. I think it should be deleted. Tony 13:53, 2 December 2006 (UTC)

Dr. Coran has made the subject of the book one of the major parts of his reseach. This book is one of the major results of that. It is probaly where most folks first learn of the subject cmacd 15:29, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

I agree, it is even mistitled. this is more about obediance then anything. I had a Basset hound that developed several ways to fool us and our other dog, but she never followed a command unless she felt like it. 66.162.99.98 21:44, 17 January 2007 (UTC) Nicholas

If you see that, why not add a contoversy section, and find some critics to cite to balance it out? The book does decribe his test methods and (to me) they do sound like intelignce tests, rembering that most dog swill not fill in little black circles on a mark-sense sheet. I run both a border Collie and a spaniel in agility and they perform in line with Coran's ranking..Unfortunatly as the spaniel is my main agilty dog...cmacd 13:39, 18 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Merge with Dog intelligence

Why should there be two articles on a topic so similar? In such a way it could seem less a "promotion" and more a scientific appendix to the mentioned article. --YoavD 08:55, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

one is on the subject, the other is about an actuall book on the subject - I could see renaming this to the interegence of dogs (book) if that would make it clearer? cmacd 14:15, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

I say don't merge. It's important to have an article that is about dog intelligence in general, even if somebody editing that article decides to use the book that this one is about as a reference. I think simply renaming this article as Cmacd123 suggested is a great idea (minus the spelling mistakes, of course:)). In fact, I think I'll "be bold" and go ahead and do that. Buck Mulligan 20:44, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

Okay, it seems I don't know how to rename this page. When I figure out how to do it, I will. Buck Mulligan 20:52, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

I don't think a merge is a good idea. As cmacd pointed out, one article is about the subject of dog intelligence and the other is about a book. Since it's been over a month since the merge was proposed, I've removed the notice. — Elembis (talk) 02:22, 7 March 2007 (UTC)