Talk:Bully Kutta

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

	Dogs Portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Dogs, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to articles on Canines on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.
Start	This article has been rated as Start-Class on the Project's quality scale.
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the importance scale.
Article Grading: The following comments were left by the quality and importance raters: (edit comments - comment history - watch comments · refresh this page) The History and use section is confusing and seems to have little useful information in it. Hopefully someone more familiar with the subject can help clearing it up a bit. --87.94.25.156 (talk) 23:34, 18 March 2008 (UTC) Aish

	This article is part of WikiProject Pakistan which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of Pakistan and Pakistan-related topics. For guidelines see WikiProject Pakistan and Wikipedia:Contributing FAQ.
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the quality scale. Please rate the article and then leave a short summary here to explain the ratings and/or to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the article.
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the importance scale.
Comments edit The History and use section is confusing and seems to have little useful information in it. Hopefully someone more familiar with the subject can help clearing it up a bit. --87.94.25.156 (talk) 23:34, 18 March 2008 (UTC) Aish

It is requested that a photograph or photographs be included in this article to improve its quality, if possible. Preferred photos show the complete animal, head to tail. Additional photos should add information, such as a face-only shot or distinct coat color or texture variants. Please do not include restricted copyright or "fair use" images.

[edit] Long list of external photo links

Wikipedia isn't a link farm--that means that articles can have external links to sites that are particularly relevant and helpful to people to get more info on the subject, but not to *every* site that has the slightest info about the topic. Would be better to have one or two links to pages from which one can reach multiple photos, rather than to individual photos with no other info. I reduced the list to one of each of the 3 dogs; don't know whether those are the best shots of each, that's up to someone else to decide. Elf | Talk 22:34, 8 September 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Note to WritersCramp

Please stop using revert to undo edits. Revert is to remove vandalism such as anonymous users coming in and writing crap in articles such as "my dog is a nice dog" or various profanities or inexplicable edits such as removing half a paragraph. It is not for working collaboratively with other wiki editors. I've already given reasons for the edits on the page. If you disagree, please discuss them. Do not use revert. Elf | Talk 00:27, 9 September 2005 (UTC)

"When not fed properly they have been known to prey on their owners." Haha! Freddy where's Jason?? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 124.184.228.4 (talk) 06:57, 10 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Note to Elf

Pictures and info on this breed are difficult to obtain, this is why they were added. There are not books or hardcopy literature published on this breed, this article is really the best reference point for someone doing research on the breed. I spent time sniffing everything available on the Internet. Please stop editing everything I do...if it wasn't for your sexuality I would begin to believe u have puppy luv for me :)

If you would ever bother to look at Wikipedia:WikiProject Dog breeds to see how dog-breed articles are organized, or for that matter any of the hundreds of other dog breed pages, and if you would learn from the changes that other people (ok, mostly me) are making to your pages, I wouldn't have to spend my time editing so many of your additions. However, as you may also have noticed if you bothered to look, I'm active on all dog-related and dog-breed related pages, attempting to hold together a strategy and consistency that has been developed by a number of people active in the dog-breed project over the last couple of years, which you seem to have no interest in. May I remind you again that Wikipedia is a collaborative effort, not a place where an individual can go and do whatever he wants in any way he wants to do it. Elf | Talk 00:51, 9 September 2005 (UTC)

These new edits are acceptable and it is good that everyone is following the same format. There are a lot of rules at the Wiki not everyone will know them in depth, in fact, I suspect it is only the few that know them at all. Cordially WritersCramp 01:21, 9 September 2005 (UTC)

True. And true. But most people who do much work here do learn a lot of the basics fairly quickly. I do not want to discourage you from contributing, because there are so many many many dog breeds and you're filling in a lot of rare ones. Not that I think you'd be easily discouraged. Elf | Talk 04:02, 9 September 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Long list of photo links again

WC, as you've now been told by two people, the long list of external links is definitely not what Wikipedia is about. It would be "acceptable" (to use your term) to have an external link to a single page from which one could then access the various photos. It would be "acceptable" to pick 2 or 3 photos to link to, since we know that this breed will be hard to find photos of. But there is no reason that I can think of to have links to that many photos. We certainly wouldn't include that many photos ON the page even if they were public domain. Please either find the external page that one can use to get to those photos and put a link to that here, or pick 2 or 3 photos to link to (and maybe also then link to a page where one can get to other photos. But having this many links is very clearly nonWikipedian. Them simply being "difficult to obtain" doesn't make something so important that it has to be in wikipedia. Especially since they're all of the same dogs over & over. Also, the dogs' names need to be removed from the article. It has been the Dog Breed Project standard not to identify dogs by name in the articles about the breed unless there is some exceptional reason to do so, which pretty much never happens. I certainly don't see it in this case. Elf | Talk 01:55, 11 September 2005 (UTC)

To clarify what I'm doing here: I'm reducing the links in this article to one image link per sub-breed. This is gives Wikipedia useful access to valuable information, but avoids making the page into an unreadable mass of links. We don't need a huge pile of links to inform the reader of this article, and Wikipedia is not a collection of links. -Harmil 03:19, 11 September 2005 (UTC)

[edit] 42 inches?

Just a question on this: the maximum height for the Bully Kutta is given as 42 inches. Is there citation for this? The Irish Wolfhound is generally considered the tallest breed, and it is described as 32-34 inches tall. Is 42 inches the height at the withers, or top of the head? Is this possibly an error converting from metric to inches?

Well, as I'm the only one who's actually read my point, let me quote from the first link, Molosserworld, which states that the dogs are: "30 to 34 inches (76-85,5 cm.) for males and 29 to 32 inches (73,5-81,5 cm.) for females."

Pic SirIsaacBrock 20:44, 29 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Reliable References

This article does not have a reference section. External links are not equivalent to a reference section. There is not a single in-text citation for this article. Thus, the Primary Sources tag. Removing the tag without fixing this problem is considered by most editors to be vandalism. I left a more detailed message concerning this on User:Headphonos talk page a few days ago. Keesiewonder ^talk Time/date stamp for this post is 20:43 February 13, 2007. Not sure why it didn't get listed. Keesiewonder ^talk 22:49, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

There are 2 references listed. The one [1] is not an appropriate reference. The other one that was removed, [2] is a much better reference and I do not see a problem citing it as such. However, there is a large amount of content in the article that appears to be orginial research (i.e., i could not find it in the artilces listed for references). If those got cited, I see no problem with this article. -- Chrislk02 (Chris Kreider) 17:42, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

I have cleaned upo the linkspam section and the reference section. I added another reference. Neither reference is from a spam site or a forum where. They are from sites that specialize in interest in Molosser breeds of dogs. I see no major issue with these sites as a reference. Sure, there could be better reference but there could also be much worse ones as well (i found a whole bunch that WOULDENT be acceptable with a google search on the topic). I am going to remove the primary references tag. If there is an issue with this, please let me know. -- Chrislk02 (Chris Kreider) 18:01, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Further research

I have done more research on this issue and believe that my initial analysis is wrong. The sites used as referece, by ther eown claims here state that "You may find some of the information published here to be different from what you will read in breed books, published encyclopedias and on other websites. We do not distort the information but rather state our perspective on the breeds based on our research and contributed information". This does not appear to be a very reliable sources. I will replace the references tag as I feel these issues need to be addressed. -- Chrislk02 (Chris Kreider) 18:17, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] External links section

There are sevearl external links which I feel are unreliable, spam, or add no value to this article. It is important that all external links in wikipedia articles be reliable, not spam and add value to the article. User:Headphonos, disagress with my removal of these links and blindly replaced them. For the sake of resolving the dispute whine maintaining the integrity of wikipedia, I have reinstated the orignial references section that I added, and have removed several links listed below for the reasons listed below.

• Molosser World - This link adds no value to the article. There is no useful content
• Beasts from the East - from a freewebs hosting site. Unreliable, unverifiable information.
• Top Dawg Kennels - From a tripod website, as stated above. unverifiable, unreliable.

The link to [[*MBK, I have no issue with and am leaving in the article

I would be glad to sort through this with any interested parties. Please feel free to cotnact me on my user talk page. -- Chrislk02 (Chris Kreider) 12:38, 16 February 2007 (UTC)

• Thanks, Chrislk02. I'd like to discuss, but am going out of town for about 10 days. Will check back later. Keesiewonder ^talk 14:55, 16 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Pictures linked

I am also removing the links to the external pictures per WP:EL, Wikipedia:External_links#What_should_be_linked has nothing related to pictures beiung linked, only articles. Please try to find a free image and upload it for inclusion on the article. If you need help doing this, I would be glad to help, please contact me on my user talk page. -- Chrislk02 (Chris Kreider) 13:09, 16 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Human Meat

Hi, I was just wondering if anyone can help me with something that has stuck in my head ever since I had first heard of this breed. I would just like to know is it true that these dogs have been known to prey on their owners when hungry? TeePee-20.7 08:48, 4 October 2007 (UTC)