Talk:American Quarter Horse/Archive 1

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Archive This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Contents

Old talk

I've noticed that many of the breed articles are kind of scattered and not all that well-written. It's sort of like everyone threw in a paragraph or two on their personal thing, but no one has taken a look at the whole. I'm taking a stab at cleanup on this one, I'm not a QH expert, so factual errors on bloodlines will have to be for others to fix, but I am a historian and a horse person, as well as an editing geek, so hopefully the changes I've added will improve readability, neutrality, and such. I also suggest more external links and references be added. Montanabw 19:48, 26 May 2006 (UTC)

Also, a plea to anyone editing ANY breed page: Let's try to remember neutral point of view and not knock anyone's breed. (I mean, I'm an Arabian afficionado, but I'm trying to make the QH page better too!)

Also, as long as there is no conflict between Wiki style, let's also say and spell things the way the breed registries do...some stuff is a term of art.

Does anyone really like the american quarter horse? there is more information at www.aqha.com.

The phrasing of the above question is odd. It's almost like: Does anyone really like the American quarter horse?

Uh, yeah! It's the most popular horse breed in the world. Lots of people that like to race horses usually buy a registered American Quarter Horse in my opinion they are the best i have 4 American Quarter Horses and 1 Registered.

I moved the page to be consistent with the title conventions. Trontonian 15:19, 18 Mar 2004 (UTC)

I added the following paragraph...

"In addition, it has also been proven to be a very useful horse in the sport of Bullfighting. In Portugal and Spain, they have been known to mix the breed with Lusitanos, making it an exceptional cross-breed. The combination of the two gives the beauty and bravery of the Lusitano, while the strength & speed is from the AQH."

I am also putting back my "external link" of our site as proof of what I am taling about. We are in the sport of "Bloodless Bullfighting" here in California. We give much care to our horses as if they were our children. While the Lusitano horse is bred for bullfighting, we lean towards acquiring a few AQH's as they have shown great strength and endurance in the arena. One of our best bullfighting horse is an AQH, which is highly wanted by a LOT of people from the European countries.

Here is our site... California Bloodless Bullfights Our site is video and image driven. It's much easier to show a video of a horse rather than trying to explain in so many words how great the horse is.

Thank you in advance for taking the time to read this. Kind Regards, --Webmistress Diva 10:38, 21 February 2006 (UTC)

Wikipedia is not a soapbox. Will revise accordingly.

No, Wikipedia is not a soapbox, but some people only write what is "common" and not ALL of the facts related to. It seems that you or whoever took off the bloodless bullfighting portion, because one might think it to be "controversial" rather than a "FACT". Well, here's fact for you. Our AQH is one of a kind, and wanted by so many, that one of the top bullfighters in Portugal purchased him from us and already has made headlines. So, if you are going to talk about the breed, you sometimes have to go to the extent of showing a sample of a horse that exemplifies what you are talking about. Because a lot of times it's all "mumbo-jumbo" and nobody knows any better other than what they are reading. Wikipedia is similar to the encyclopedia where it should be able to educate a person and NOT exclude real facts. And because this is the "internet", it's easier to include a lot more information than your typical encyclopedia.

The reason why I push for "Bloodless Bullfighting" is this.... unlike the traditional style in Spain and Mexico, the bulls at Bloodless Bullfights in California are NOT bled, NOR are they killed at the end. And because they are not bled, it takes an extremely brave and talented horse to outrun and outsmart a bull. In addition, the bloodless bullfight truly shows the art and skill of both the horse and the horse rider.

Does any of this make sense? I hope so.
--Webmistress Diva 03:13, 2 December 2006 (UTC)

Copied previouis editor's comments to new topic

A previous user published personal opinions that were off-topic, so I started the appropriate topic and copied their comments to that page: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Horse_slaughter.

American Quarter Horses and Horses, In My Opinion

I think horses are interesting and an amazing species, but American Quarter Horses are highly liked among Americans and over-sea horse-lovers. Lots of horse racers like to have an American Quarter Horse because they are breed to run the quarter mile. These horses have proven themselves what they were breed for. The American Quarter Horse can range from 14.3 to 16 hands in height. They have a wide range of colours also [ any solid ]. A proven fact of these beautiful horses that they can run a quarter mile faster than any other breed. I can't believe in that last discussion the person asked if anyone even liked American Quarter Horses. To me that is just the outrageous comment I have ever heard about horses. In conclusion I think all horses are great horses are like people they have feelings and senses too. They are a very important animal in the world. Nikky Furrie for more comments and information on horses please contact www.stcgirl33@yahoo.com

Um, very nice, but why would some kid's opinion (as opposed to fact) be relevant? QHs are not as popular where people don't ride stock breeds.

just cleaned up formatting of the aboveMontanabw 23:02, 23 August 2006 (UTC)

Sentence Structure

This is a really great start on an article, but it seems like a lot of the sentences are ambiguous or unclear. I’ve gone through and tried to fix some ambiguities, like the ones below.

“The versatile Quarter Horses is also shown in English disciplines, driving, and many other horse activities.”

What is this sentence trying to say? That the versatility of the QH is demonstrated by its use in English disciplines? That the “versitile QH” is also used in English discipline? Also, “horse activities” makes me think of the activities horses do on their own, such as eating, rolling in dirt etc (lol), so I’m changing it to “equestrian events.”

“Commonly believed to be the world’s fastest horse…”

Commonly believed by whom? (See WP:CITE) I’ll try to find a citation for this, unless someone already knows of one.

“One of the most famous of these early imports was a Thoroughbred grandson of the Godolphin Arabian, Janus, foaled in 1746 and imported to colonial Virginia.”

This sentence is unclear: Was Janus foaled in 1746, or was the grandson? Was the Godolphin Arabian named Janus, or was Janus the grandson?

After some research, I’ve reworded it to this:

“One of the most famous of these early imports was Janus, a Thoroughbred who was the grandson of the Godolphin Arabian. He was foaled in 1746, and imported to colonial Virginia in 1756.”

and hopefully it’s clearer now. I'll keep working on it, and if I've misinterpreted a sentence meaning, please feel free to fix it.Tanyia 19:34, 23 August 2006 (UTC)

Looks like some good edits, my earlier edits of what was a complete disaster of an article were only of the most basic "cleanup" variety and I didn't dig too deeply into the overall article to fine-tune some of the weaker spots. I'll look over your changes more carefully and if I see room for improvement will make a few tweaks. I thought I had a cite in there to where QH's have been clocked at 50 mph, but maybe that's on the horse article or the horse racing article...check...seems like I saw the stat on aqha.com Montanabw 23:01, 23 August 2006 (UTC)

Number of Horses Worldwide

I just looked at AQHA.com to get a citation for "4 million horses wordlwide," but they say there are 3,224,096 horses registered worldwide, so I've changed it. Was the 4 million including something other than the AQHA registered horses? Tanyia 17:46, 25 August 2006 (UTC)

If that's their official count and you've cited it, then let's keep it. Montanabw 03:35, 26 August 2006 (UTC)
Well, there are probably a considerable number of unregistered horses, but I don't know of any study attempting to estimate the count of these. Deco 11:14, 26 August 2006 (UTC)
I think technically, an unregistered horse is a "quarter-type" horse and not officially a Quarter Horse--at least, I am sure that's the registry's position. Usually a registerable horse that is not registered is that way for a reason--it's a cull and considered unsuitable for registration (by its breeder, at least). This would be true for any breed. For Wikipedia's purposes, we need to cite verifiable information, so I support using the figures of the AQHA, who, presumably wants there to be as many Quarter horses as possible to boost their claim of being #1. ;-) Montanabw 21:49, 27 August 2006 (UTC)

Worldwide - do we now include the overseas contingents - such as the Australian QHA? www.aqha.com.au

I'm not sure I want to start a seperate page on Australian QH, but is there space/ topic room here? The EI scare in Australia may be topical, etc but does Australia deserve its own page? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.38.197.215 (talk) 12:26, 9 January 2008 (UTC)

There is probably room here for a small section on the American Quarter Horse breed in Australia. (FYI, there is also a separate article on Australian Stock Horse, too) The EI issue is not breed-specific, so irrelevant here, though I think there may be an article on equine influenza in here somewhere, check Category:Horse diseases) Feel free to either draft something here or just do an edit in the article and if it needs some work, the rest of us will tweak it as needed. Try to have some footnotes so we can verify the sources. Montanabw(talk) 04:30, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

Oddity

Would the hind quarters of a quarter horse be only one-sixteenth of a horse? Wahkeenah 00:13, 9 November 2006 (UTC)

<GROAN!> Montanabw 06:00, 9 November 2006 (UTC)

NO POV Pushing

Removed all references to bloodless bullfighting. This is a repeated instance of POV pushing of what is obviously your own personal business. You have repeatedly been violating any number of wikipedia policies with this, across multiple articles, and in absence of citations to verifiable references other than your own self-promotional materials, this material is nothing more than a POV soapbox and business promotion. I really do not wish to submit this issue to formal arbitration, but you really have to let it go. YOU CANNOT PROMOTE YOURSELF ON WIKIPEDIA!!! You must have a neutral point of view. Go fix the bloodless bullfiighting article, list all the breeds you want to there, but leave these breed articles alone, please. There are probably 10 quarter horses in the country that are trick horses or whatever too. We don't put in a laundry list of every last thing you do with horses. Montanabw 04:10, 2 December 2006 (UTC)


NOT A PROMOTION!!!!.... STOP THAT!!!

It's called increasing the awareness of what these breeds can do OTHER THAN running around a track or being used for the ranch.

Just an FYI, I am the "3rd party" you are seeking for. This is not my business. I don't make money off these bullfights.... gosh I wish! I'm sure that "once-upon-a-time" long before Wikipedia existed, there's this book called the "encyclopedia", that when certain trends, attributes or what have you in life evolves, changes, or has been known,.... I'm sure that they've re-written it to include these things. It's like our good ol dictionary, when "new" words develop, they add it in there. Words that we consider to be a slang and not a real word, but it still manages to make it into Webster.

In any case, you are being petty about two simple words "bloodless bullfighting". And just because you can't find it while you are googling it DOES NOT mean it doesn't exist. And this is the latest trend in this breed of horse. You wouldn't know because you're not part of the mix.

Well, I'm NOT trying to argue with you here.... just trying to get you to see my point of view. --Webmistress Diva 03:35, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

I think my point has just been demonstrated by your response. Put it in the bullfighting articles. And frankly, if you can't Google it, it probable IS pretty obscure. You can Google almost anything. If you are a "Webmistress" worth your salt, you should know how to make Google work for you.
You don't make money off bullfights perhaps, but you clearly are advertising your horses, I've checked the web site, and that is a violation of Wikipedia policy. You also CANNOT be a "third party" on Wikipedia you are the author--that also violates the WP:No original research standard and Wikipedia is not a soapbox standard.
I'm trying not to be harsh, but with all due respect, you are obsessed. Montanabw 05:29, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

I'm not obsessed, I'm just a very passionate person. If I was so obsessed, I would be on Wiki everyday, which I'm not. And I didn't say you can't google it.... silly. I said that even if you can't find it, it does not mean that it does not exist. Yes, I am the Webmistress, and true, I can find everything and anyone on the net.... very scary, isn't it. And you're wrong about the horses on the site. I am showing them off. This site is purely hobby..... an expensive one too!

By the way, why aren't you on the list of "arbritrators" to vote on? Isn't that what you do? I was going to vote for you too. Cause I know you do your job so well!... seriously!!! --Webmistress Diva 18:21, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

General content of the page.

The general content of the AQH page was great. I have been an owner, trainer and exhibitor of the AQH. The breed is extremely capable of any task asked of it. It is intelligent, biddable and usually gentle. You have discussed and covered all of that. Thanks for your efforts on behalf of all readers, whether owners, breeders, trainers, of just lovers. I enjoyed my stay here. Cary Roach. 5/27/07, @11:00am.

Peter McCue's bloodlines and when was a quarter horse a quarter horse

Hm.. let's find some wording we can both agree on. Peter McCue is generally acknowledged to have been sired by a non-Thoroughbred stallion (his breeders so presented him to everyone but the Jockey Club and registered him with the Jockey Club only to be able to race him on the recognized tracks). Calling him a 'registered Thoroughbred' without some sort of qualifier leaves the impression in the article that he was a Thoroughbred. I think it really all comes down to when did the quarter horse actually become a quarter horse - when the AQHA was founded or when folks started breeding for them? I'll admit that my wording was less than perfect, and would love to find something better, but the weight of evidence in most published sources is that Peter McCue wasn't a long distance Thoroughbred. Suggestions for how to get the fact that he wasn't really a Thoroughbred but isn't a Quarter horse across? Ealdgyth | Talk 03:20, 25 June 2007 (UTC)

Well, what's his pedigree? If he was not a Thoroughbred, what was he called at the time -- back in the 1800's? Why did the Jockey Club accept him if he wasn't a Thoroughbred... fraud? Looser regulations? (FYI, the jockey club of the UK has issues with the US Jockey Club because they argue we have quite a few horses in there of questionable pedigree, particularly from around the time of the Civil War, when a lot of horses were lost and records destroyed) In short, it would be OK to say whatever can be verified. (Does the AQHA web site have anything that helps??)
If he was registered with the Jockey Club, that raises the presumption that he was a Thoroughbred, so let's just lay out the evidence here on the talk page and see what it says. But fow now, best that Peter Mc Cue remain a "Thoroughbred" until we can more definitively explain exactly what he was. Once it's sorted out, we can then insert something into the article that fits.
As for when the Quarter Horse became a Quarter Horse, that may be a question of etymological history. I presume the term was used somewhat before the formation of the AQHA, but how long before probably requires some kind of source. We had the colonial "Virginia Quarter-Miler," but that probably wasn't what they were calling their cow ponies on the Waggoner Ranch... Montanabw 19:38, 25 June 2007 (UTC)
His Jockey Club pedigree has him sired by Duke of the Highlands. However, his breeder sold him as sired by Dan Tucker, a 'short horse.' He was advertised at stud in Oklahoma as by Dan Tucker (this would have been around 1910). There is a handwritten pedigree in the AQHA archives by a later owner that has Peter McCue's pedigree listing Peter's sire as Dan Tucker (this is circa 1918 or so). In the archives of the American Quarter Horse Association in Amarillo, there is even a letter from the son of Peter McCue's breeder giving Peter McCue's sire along with a notarized affidavit attesting to the same. The Jockey Club accepted him based on basically a fraudulent pedigree, although it has to be borne in mind that at the time, the Jockey Club was just starting to regulate the tracks and tighten up the registration requirements. Folks who for years had been racing their horses on the tracks suddenly were being told that their bloodlines weren't good enough, when they had been good enough in the past. So they resorted to fraud to continue to do what they had always done. The American Stud book was actually started by a man named S. D. Bruce, and the Jockey Club bought it from him later (around volume 7 or so). So I have to agree with the UK folks, the US stud books DO have a lot of horses of questionable pedigree!
The AQHA carries Peter McCue as sired by Dan Tucker, this is how he's listed in their Hall of Fame exhibits and in their computer programs. There is an extensive list of articles about Peter McCue, including a number by Joe Estes in the 1940's Bloodhorse where this whole question was thrashed out between Robert Denhardt and Estes. I have an article by Denhardt that published Peter McCue's racing record, as well as my own research on the subject, and it shows that Peter McCue never won a race past 5 furlongs, and never ran any race past 6 furlongs. Most of his best finishes were at 4 furlongs. Most of these races were at small Midwestern tracks, although he went to Windsor, Ontario once. I probably should have researched Duke of the Highlands and Nora M at the same time, but hindsight is 20-20! Certainly his racing record is suggestive of something less than perfect Thoroughbred breeding.
Turning to the question of what he would have been called at the time, the American Stud Book volume 7 (1898) has some pedigrees in the back that are in their 'Appendix', which is what they called 'consisting of mares with short pedigrees whose produce is not eligible for registration in the main body of the work'. Later, after the Jockey Club bought out Bruce and started publishing the American Stud Book, they no longer published these horses in the American Stud Book, but they continued to register horses descended from horses in Volume 7's appendix ... 'for racing purposes only'. These registrations can be followed in the Jockey Club's publications Foals of ♦year♦ This program stopped in 1931. Anyway, besides the utterly unrelated to the Peter McCue but fascinating subject of Pan Zareta's maternal ancestress Mittie Stephens who is also listed in this section, there are several horses in here listed as 'quarter horse' or 'quarter mare'. One specifically is Mollie by Tar River, whose dam is given as 'a quarter mare.' Or Nelly by Kingsland, whose second dam is Jane by Ole Bull - quarter horse. The type is unclear on that whether it is one word or two on that last one. So it's safe to assume that at least some folks around the time that Peter McCue were foaled were using the term quarter horse. Volume 7 of the 'American Stud Book' is also the volume where Peter McCue's registration took place, on page 789.
I hope this laid out the background a bit better, I'm more than happy to dig more through my article files and give a big long bibliography, etc. if you'd like, but I figured I'd spare everyone else, because I'm sure their eyes are glazing over! And yes, eventuall all this information, with sources, will be going on Peter McCue's page, along with the bibliography.Ealdgyth | Talk 21:31, 25 June 2007 (UTC)

Your mission, my friend, is to now figure out how to condense all of this into less than a sentence for THIS article! (bwahahahaha!). OK, I'll be kind, start with this and tweak it: "Peter McCue, registered as a Thoroughbred (?) but of disputed pedigree..." By the way, being a sprinter alone doesn't throw the pedigree into question, look at Three Bars, for example...for that matter, there are a LOT of TB races today at 5 furlongs, especially for two year olds and out on smaller tracks. Montanabw 02:20, 26 June 2007 (UTC)

Actually that works fine. I'm inclined to believe he was sired by Dan Tucker, but there is certainly room for dispute. I really need to go back to Keeneland's library and pull out his parent's racing records... someday.Ealdgyth | Talk 02:30, 26 June 2007 (UTC)

Hmmm. Yeah, best way to handle a dispute is to just call it that and go on. Go back to Keeneland, eh? Very cool that it sounds like you ever got there in the first place! Montanabw 04:19, 26 June 2007 (UTC)