Talk:Equestrianism

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Equestrianism article.
Article policies
WikiProject Equine This article is within the scope of WikiProject Equine, a collaborative effort to improve Wikipedia's coverage of articles relating to horses, asses, zebras, hybrids, equine health, equine sports, etc. Please visit the project page for details or ask questions at the barn.
B This page has been rated as B-Class on the quality assessment scale
Top This article has been rated as top-importance on the importance assessment scale
Sports icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Sports. For more information, visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.
Sports and games Portal
B This article has been rated as B-Class on the assessment scale.
Sports To-do:
This article is part of the "Olympic events" set of articles nominated for Version 0.7. Discuss this nomination, or see the set nominations page for more details.


Contents

[edit] Expanded

i never thought that this equetrian game is so good,fan,


I think this page needs to be expanded in terms of perhaps methods of teaching/training and also the different disciplines of riding. There is nothing on hacking or trekking and little on English riding. Ashfan83 15:42, 2 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Possible material for incorporation--with some editing?

I removed this paragraph from the horse behavior article, as it seems more applicable here.

These insights are based upon natural horsemanship principles. The first known instances of natural horsemanship were writtten by Xenophon in On Horsemanship. Lost during the Dark Ages, natural horsemanship was reborn again during the Renaissance in the schools that trained horses for military cavalry. There is an unbroken line from these trainers and institutions to the Olympic equestrian sport of dressage. This discipline is still the foundation which other equestrian sports such as eventing and stadium jumping build upon. One of the most revered institutions of the art of dressage is the Spanish Riding School of Vienna. Montanabw 18:19, 19 June 2006 (UTC)

I disagree in part: Natural Horsemanship to me has everything to do with horse behaviour and the interaction between horse and man, i.e. the way we train horses to do our bidding. At the same time, true "natural horsemanship" to me are the training methods of people like Monty Roberts and Ferdinand Hempfling, which are based totally on horse behaviour and is in many ways different to the traditional military, and later civilian methods used in equestrian sports today. I didn't manage to find the original context of this paragraph in the Horse behaviour article, but still feel that it belongs there, although perhaps in a briefer form. The point really is whether the history of training horses belongs in "Horse behaviour" or in "Equestrianism"? I still lean towards "Horse behaviour", but with some editing!

--Wilma Sweden 01:14, 9 August 2006 (UTC)

To complicate matters, there is also an article on Horse Breaking where it also could go. The horse behavior article is really more of a horse psychology piece, not a training piece. "Natural" Horsemanship is more a training philosophy. And not even a new one.
The Horse breaking article was obviously developed by a major Monty Roberts fan, maybe the paragraph needs to go there. But it's also just poorly written as is, needs an edit
Like I say below, the horse articles in Wiki are actually extensive, but no one can find them! Montanabw 16:32, 9 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Corrections to be made

The Olympic section needs editing, we need to check whether vaulting, reining and driving haven't been made into Olympic sports? One could also mention the other major international tournaments like the World Cup and Samsung Nations' cup.

Other points barely covered: para-equestrianism, pony competitions and Young Riders, Breeder's shows and of course, general expansion of the European/Olympic forms of competition. I'm aiming to look into the European sections in the next few weeks, hopefully before Aachen!

I have also noticed that very few famous equestrian performers are covered in Wiki as a whole, would it be appropriate to include a few here, or should they go under their respective sports, such as show jumping/dressage/eventing/driving? --Wilma Sweden 01:33, 9 August 2006 (UTC)

The Horse category is HUGE and very disorganized. There are in fact articles on most of these things--somewhere. There are articles on hunters, jumpers, Olympic Equestrian (though that article is terrible!), almost every breed out there, most of the international and American organizations, etc. The problem is lack of linking and lack of good categorization. Everyone can help with that problem! Montanabw 16:28, 9 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] External links

I have removed the External links because none of them seem to meet Wikipedia's standards for External links WP:LINKS. "it is not Wikipedia's purpose to include a comprehensive list of external links related to each topic". The pages linked are home pages and therefore have no specific information related to this article (and 5 of those six links specifically relate to other articles re: Dressage, Endurance riding, ect). A web page could have information somewhere in their content that could be cited and linked but that specific page on that website should be linked, NOT the websites homepage. For example:

Wikipedia also asks that: "If the site or page to which you want to link includes information that is not yet a part of the article, consider using it as a source first" Fountains of Bryn Mawr 22:53, 31 December 2006 (UTC)

I'm putting these links back in for the main reason that the External links list has already been reduced (mostly by me and a couple other editors) to about 1/3 the length it once was. Also, I do this because the Equestrianism article is largely unsourced (very insufficient footnotes, but I haven't the time or energy to fix this particular problem). What was left of the link list were primary links to major riding organizations of national or international importance. It is, for example, impossible to reproduce the entire USEF rule book and people may very well need this reference. The other articles are, in come cases, very weak articles without good sourcing. So if you insist on removing these links, then please either create a new article on each of these topics or at least check the existing articles to see we have them in the "see also" section AND that the organizational link to their sanctioning group is included in these articles. Having written articles for Wikipedia that have achieved "Good Article" status, I believe you are applying too rigid a standard for external links. We have enough trouble with people who keep putting in links to their personal business, farm, local club, etc...sigh. Montanabw 22:56, 1 January 2007 (UTC)


"External links" is not the place for "Reference" or the place to propose future articles (that can be done in a "Reference" heading and in TALK respectively). Wikipedia is not a directory to link someone to the "USEF rule book"; it is an encyclopedia that should explain why knowing about the "USEF rule book" would be informative to the reader. And a link to "USEF rule book" should be in the context of the article... it is very uninformative (and un-encyclopedic) to link it under external links with zero explanation.
The following links are a slam-dunk for removal:
The remainder:
could probably use a page on Wikipedia but again "External links" is not the place to propose that.
It is not my place as an editor to look at some external links and figure out if someone is keeping them for some non-obvious reason... again that is what TALK is for, it is my job to say "hmm... these simply are not adding any information". Fountains of Bryn Mawr 04:01, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

I think your problem is primarily with semanics. "External links" are places people can go for more information. They are appropriate, and here, where the topic is so huge and there is no single "Equestrianism" source, there is a need for multiple sources. While I agree that they don't need to be extensive, and perhaps some could be reclassified as "References", "Sources" or "For more information" -- or whatever-- I think you misunderstand the wikipedia principle here. The principle is to provide needed information to the reader. And, again, if you want to go to the other articles and verify that their links are all good and link properly, that may be a job worth doing. All I am really asking is that you realize that there are a lot of people working on this page who are taking something that was a total mess six months ago and have brought it a long ways in terms of removing link farm links, repeatedly reverting a pornographic image that some idiot keeps putting in here because they think it's funny, moving extensive material on a narrow topic into a new article, and generally work on improving substantive content. We don't need an edit war over this. The whole article still needs organizational work, it may benefit from having some content merged with existing articles or new articles created, and in the meantime, I think that links to the major sanctioning organizations for worldwide equestrian activity will stand up under scrutiny until the overall article has things like sources and footnotes. Montanabw 04:44, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Horseback riding and animal cruelty

I recently read an article saying horseback riding belongs to animal cruelty. Perhaps an expert can verify to what an extent this is true and then include the results with cited references in the article. Skypher 19:10, 29 January 2007 (UTC)

IMHO, riding as cruel per se is pretty strong POV. And, anyway, this article already has a long "cruelty" section under the "criticism of horses in sport", it's at the bottom of the article. Plenty of material and many wikilinks. You could say this particular horse has in fact been beaten to death...the whole article needs more citations,overall, but that's a different issue. Montanabw 00:29, 30 January 2007 (UTC)
The section you mention is indeed not satisfactory, just a collection of "might be"s and "could be"s. No information on hard, for example medical, facts, nothing particular on horseback riding... Skypher 18:02, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

Find it, cite it, add it. Don't whine. If you want to put in the proposed language here first before sticking it the article, go ahead, probably best, actually. However, remember that Wikipedia is NPOV. And you will also start an edit war on this highly controversial topic, so tread with great care. Riding done properly isn't cruel in the eyes of anyone but extremist animal rights people. I mean, is there a section in the fishing that says fishing is cruel to fish? Montanabw 20:09, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Necessary Section Missing

The article neglects to mention warfighting, one of the most prominent historical uses of the horse. Fuegonel23 19:22, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

See the VERY EXTENSIVE and long, detailed article Horses in Warfare, which IS linked from this article. Montanabw(talk) 18:43, 27 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Iceland

Can we have a section on horse-riding in Iceland as their style of equestrianism is unique —Preceding unsigned comment added by Catherinefionarichardson (talk • contribs) 17:32, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

See Icelandic horse. Seems the breed of horses are unique, but the riders don't appear to be (grin), I know there are some riding style things related to riding gaited horses generally, maybe you want to look at equitation. If there is some unique aspect to riding Icelandics, maybe explain what you mean here and I can direct you to the appropriate article or make a suggestion for a new article. Also maybe take a look at gaited horse and ambling, these are the general articles on gaited horses. The problem is that EVERY gaited breed(heck, every breed, gaited or otherwise, we have over 350 breed articles in the task force...sigh) thinks their breed is unique...don't want to start edit wars with, say, the Peruvian Paso crowd (smile). Montanabw(talk) 20:34, 15 February 2008 (UTC)


[edit] Gambling section

I am proposing getting rid of the gambling section.... I have nothing against a good wager, however, it doesn't seem to flow with the article and I find the section is too long/detailed. It doesn't seem to me to be integral to 'equestrianism.' Can we just mention betting on horses, and then link to the gambling page? --AeronM (talk) 01:58, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

I have mixed feelings on the issue. On one hand, I kind of agree with you, I bet on a few horse races on occasion and gambling is big money in the horse industry, on the other hand, the relevance is questionable. Guess I don't care deeply either way, but whoever added the section, whenever it was added, cared. I suggest we let it sit a week or so here as a discussion and see if anyone else weighs in. You may also want to read what's in the horse racing article and the articles on gambling or parimutual betting to see if a simple wikilink or two would be apt. It's also possible that it could just be added to the laundry lists at the end of the article. Montanabw(talk) 03:40, 26 March 2008 (UTC)
There seems to be a very good description on the parimutuel gambling page... I suggest a wikilink and remove section here. --AeronM (talk) 01:38, 30 March 2008 (UTC)
Wouldn't break my heart. I say go for it. Use the "Main" template to link to the appropriate articles, perhaps both the horse racing one and the parimutuel one. Been several days now. Maybe see if Cuddy Witter has an opinion, that editor patrols the horse racing articles a lot. Montanabw(talk) 02:11, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Re-Do Sections?

These section headings need a bit of clean-up... for example, 'English Riding' is bold, but 'Western Riding' is a section heading. Also, could we organize the headings a bit better, for example, using English and Western as major section headings, with other things falling under these, such as


[edit] English

    • Dressage
    • Show Jumping
    • Saddle Seat, etc
Dressage and show jumping are listed in the Olympic/International section

[edit] Western

    • Rodeo
    • Roping, etc
<- Roping is a rodeo event. Montanabw(talk) 02:29, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Harness/Driving

etc. etc.? --AeronM (talk) 01:45, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

The harness stuff in general needs expansion. Montanabw(talk) 02:29, 30 March 2008 (UTC)
I don't disagree with you that there may be a better way to organize the article, but it needs to be handled carefully so as not to, for one thing, provoke one of those "US-Centric" spats, which has hit this article in the past. (Arrgh).
I did make "English" into a full section heading, that kind of made sense. Note that one problem is that what we Americans call "English" riding lumps in a lot of things that people in other nations (particularly where virtually ALL riding is "English") break out into separate disciplines. Plus some things about how the article is structured (which long predates me, by the way) I think represented some sort of compromise between UK and US writers. Long story short, the international disciplines of Dressage, Jumping and Eventing are up in that earlier section, while the stuff sort of unique to the US is in the "English" section. Not sure if that can't be improved upon, but there was some logic to the break out (I think the Olympic section was there before the English section.)
Hmmm, side question: are there any Western Olympic events/competitions? --AeronM (talk) 03:12, 1 April 2008 (UTC)
I hesitate to lump rodeo with other western riding material because, for one thing, there are rodeos in Australia and South America, so it isn't just a "western" discipline, though that is its best-known form. Also, rodeo only sort of plays nicely with the other western disciplines, there is not a lot of cross-over between practitioners. It's possible that the rodeo section is disproportionately long and could be cut down quite a bit, seeing as how there are several long articles on the competition and all the various events. I'll think about that piece a bit.
At any rate that's my two bits. I'm not opposed to playing around with section header rearranging a bit, though maybe don't alter content much for now. This article sort of represents a lot of delicate compromises from a lot of different editors over the years, and is also subject to a significant amount of vandalism and nonsense editing. Many, many sections were broken off into separate articles over the years, it is pretty bad for looking put together by a committee. It may also be worth going to WikiProject Equine and seeing if the group as a whole wants to make a project out of it. Montanabw(talk) 02:29, 30 March 2008 (UTC)
(answering Aeron) Rumors persist that Reining is just short of being an Olympic event. FEI sanctions it now, I believe (double check me on that, I don't keep up with that sort of thing that close). Reining is probably the only western event that has a chance. Perhaps barrel racing, but that's a long shot. Cutting is too expensive! Ealdgyth - Talk 03:16, 1 April 2008 (UTC)