Talk:Cotswold sheep

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

{{WPE|class=start

Agriculture
Agropedia Portal
This article is within the scope of the WikiProject Agriculture, which collaborates on articles related to agriculture. To participate, you can edit this article or visit the project page for more details.
??? This article has not yet received a rating on the quality scale.
??? This article has not yet received a rating on the importance scale.
Assessment comments
Mammals
Mammals Portal
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Mammals, a project to improve Wikipedia's articles on Mammal-related subjects. Please participate by editing the article, and help us assess and improve articles to good and 1.0 standards, or visit the wikiproject page for more details.
Start This article has been rated as start-class on the quality scale.
Low This article has been rated as low-importance on the importance scale.
Assessment comments
It is requested that a photograph or photographs be included in this article to improve its quality.
Wikipedians in the following regions may able to help:
  • Gloucestershire
  • Warwickshire
  • Oxfordshire
  • Wiltshire
  • Somerset
  • Worcestershire
The Free Image Search Tool (FIST) may be able to locate suitable images on Flickr and other web sites.
To-do list for Cotswold sheep: edit · history · watch · refresh

Here are some tasks you can do:
  • Requests: photo of a Cotswold sheep
  • Expand: geographic coverage. Are Cotswolds bred today in other sheep-farming countries, or only in the USA?

[edit] The See also debate

I am starting this discussion here by the advice of an admin and by policy of WP:3O.
The user:Saga City believes that the current See also section is nonsense and should be removed. However, as the editor who added it, I feel that it should stay. Originally, there were four links. Two were already mentioned in the article and removed by Wizardman. That made sense and was explained. However, the other two links are related to the sheep industry and are there for further reading. --BlindEagletalk~contribs 10:05, 7 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] My opinion

I think it makes sense to have sheep related interlinks within a sheep breed article. To know how to protect your flock with guardian animals as well as how to shear the sheep is good, general knowledge. I'm not sure why this isn't common sense. But, it appears to have provoked an emotional response from user:Saga City on my talk page after I warned the user about deleting chunks of text without explanation or citation. See my posts Delete warning and the user's replies Saga City reply All constructive comments are welcome. --BlindEagletalk~contribs 10:05, 7 April 2007 (UTC)

I removed the See also section again today, before reading this talk page (I didn't realise it was contentious). The two links in it are not specific to Cotswolds, and belong in a general article on sheep, not splashed across all breed articles. A reader looking at a breed article is unlikely to have found it without some general knowledge of sheep. --Scott Davis Talk 03:54, 15 May 2007 (UTC)
Even though the two See Also links are used with Cotswold sheep they don't belong? But, if you go with your line of reasoning, most See Also links should be removed throughout Wikipedia. --BlindEagletalk~contribs 12:43, 15 May 2007 (UTC)
The see also links should be directly related to the topic, and be likely that readers will want to follow them. Many things are "used with Cotswold sheep", but don't belong. We could fill every sheep breed article with loosely related links such as sheep dip, paddock, fence, hoof, wide comb, truck, farm, mulesing, fly strike and so on. I'd accept a sheep navbox template, but a few odd links in a see also section don't cut it. If these two topics are particularly relevant to cotswolds, they can be linked in the prose quite easily. List of sheep breeds would be something that is harder to link in prose, and might fit in "See also". I'm not sure about most, but yes, many see also lists are excessive. --Scott Davis Talk 14:05, 15 May 2007 (UTC)
A sheep nav box is a good idea. It would provide a solid foundation for loosely related links (as you say) for sheep articles. It would also allow the See Also section to be more narrow in scope as is intended by other editors. How do you go about setting up a sheep nav box? --BlindEagletalk~contribs 15:36, 15 May 2007 (UTC)