Talk:Merino

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

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.
B This article has been rated as B-class on the quality scale.
Mid This article has been rated as mid-importance on the importance scale.
Assessment comments

Added Australian History, the old section marked history is not 100% but will wait to see what happens before altering (somewone else might fix it). Article needs more USA history and South Africa History to balance. Need some decent photoes of Merinos and shearing of same, before article can move forward; will organise. Charles Esson 10:34, 16 September 2006 (UTC)

Editing notes

Vermont Merino Australian Sheep and Wool Handbook has William Jarvis importing about 15000 sheep. Sheep production and management had William Jarvis importing at least 3500. I went for the US ref.

History section of the article reads: They were first brought over to Maine from Portugal in 1810 illegaly by Capt. Ephraim Sturdivant.

First off it would only have been illegal from England point of view. As Sturdivant was born in the US one has to assume he was a US citizen and thus it was not illegal. War is like that.

Second, so the captian took part in the "Merino Craze" and imported some sheep to Maine, important for Sturdivant perhaps, is it worth a mention in history of the breed.

In short a little from the beginning could go at the start of Australian history, most of the rest is covered with dates in the Australian History section anyway.

If I merge like that what is missing is a what happened to the vermont breed between 1812 and 1866 something went horrible wrong, and what is the Delaine, it doesn't get a mention in the Australian History. There is also a South African history that is important.

Charles Esson 13:26, 16 September 2006 (UTC)

Merged "History of Australia" and "History" as the latter added little. Article is now too biased towards Australia, I need south africa and US refs to fix that up. The refs I have pretty much sum it up, the Australian sheep book is about 80% merino, the US sheep book at about 2%. Charles Esson 23:24, 16 September 2006 (UTC)

Historical Magazine: And Notes and Queries Concerning the Antiquities, History, and Biography of... http://books.google.com.au/books?vid=LCCN05005123&id=eunhyYrr8YAC&pg=PA26&lpg=PA26&dq=merino+sheep&as_brr=1 First to import to USA Humphreys or Livingston. Seems to be some dispute. 61.9.139.165 11:31, 17 September 2006 (UTC)

Cottle definitly says the dutch gov got their sheep in 1790; 1780s in South Africa states they arrived in South Africa in 1789 this will have to be sorted out. I will have to find a second ref 61.9.139.165 10:02, 27 September 2006 (UTC)

In the History section, is it Germany's or Germans' in this paragraph?:

The Napoleonic wars (1793-1813) almost destroyed the Spanish Merino industry. The old cavanas where dispersed or slaughtered. From 1810 onwards the Merino scene shifted to Germany, the United States and Australia. Between 1810 and 1840 Australia was engaged in a wool trade war with Germany while importing German Sheep. By 1840 Australia had won the war mainly because of German's preoccupation with fineness.

I'm guessing Germany's and I will be bold 09:18, 29 September 2006 (UTC)

Thanks, I would have never picked it up; your right it should have been Germany's Charles Esson 16:23, 29 September 2006 (UTC)


Facing up to reality-----

You can't write an honest history of the breed unless you face up to reality. The merino breed is where it is today because it has been developed for economic returns not as one would develop a breed for dog shows. Paragraph added at start to try and explain this and then edits added as I find references for the introduction genetic material. Charles Esson 00:38, 30 September 2006 (UTC)

animal welfare----

In tidying this I have been reflecting. The net result of the PETA campain is probable going to be the end of some genetic lines; I suppiose thats fair man created them, man can destoy them. As a humun what would be your choice if the options were circumcision of your son or the end of your genetic line. Charles Esson 12:08, 6 October 2006 (UTC)

Contents

[edit] merge from Booroola Merino

I think we should merge the article Booroola Merino into this article. Alan.ca 08:58, 21 December 2006 (UTC)

It depends on how the users use the system. As it is you can now find an entry on the Booroola merino if you want to find out what it is; if you merge you can't. Further I think an article on the merino would be several thousand words longer before you would bother mentioning the Booroola. It really isn't that important. It really is a bit of a stub, I thought I it was more complete. Charles Esson 03:11, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

The article was more complete, reverted Booroola merino to version before vandalism.

Well if there is going to be mention of more than one strain of merino then by all means bring Booroola into a section under /*Strains*/ or /*Bloodlines*/. It's what my dad used to run...
If Booroola Merino was merged then turned into a redirect people would end up at this article.
From the article the only notable issue is, it was involved in the NZ genome project.Garrie 00:05, 12 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] removing irrelevant links

This article is about merino, not other animals.Bob98133 (talk) 21:49, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

I think you are correct. This article is about the Merino breed of sheep. The See also section is to understand about aspects of the breed. One aspect is that the Merinos are guarded by other types of livestock like donkeys and llamas. If you would like to discuss this further or if you feel that there is an impass, I would be more than willing to discuss or debate this with a third party involved. --BlindEagletalk~contribs 18:59, 3 March 2008 (UTC)
OK, I see. I didn't know that. But anyhow, that information should be included in the article somewhere, along with the wiki-links, because the See Also section isn't really the right place for it.Bob98133 (talk) 21:52, 3 March 2008 (UTC)
Where would you suggest? I'm willing to write a brief blurb about livestock guardians and include it in this article. --BlindEagletalk~contribs 20:17, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

There is plenty of information about livestock guardians in the main sheep article, which this article links to. There is no significant difference in using guardians with the merino breeds, so a blurb here isn't necessary. Remember that it's important to stay strictly on topic. This means that general info about sheep, such as predator prevention, should go in the general sheep article. Only merino-specific facts should go in the merino article. The See also section should be kept to a minimum. Linking terms , such as wool, that are linked in the article already is redundant. VanTucky 22:12, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

This is the guideline I'm folloowing: WP:ALSO. Am I missing something? Are you the owner of this article? The See Also section is a matter of editorial judgement. --BlindEagletalk~contribs 13:12, 5 March 2008 (UTC)
As an occasional editor of this article, I am against the inclusion of a link to Guard Llamas in this article for previously stated reasons. Bob98133 (talk) 13:45, 5 March 2008 (UTC)
It was originally removed without consensus. --BlindEagletalk~contribs 19:36, 5 March 2008 (UTC)
BlindEagle, please AGF and stop throwing around accusations such as attempts are ownership. You are the only one in the discussion who wants to include the link to Guard llamas and the like. WP:V clearly states that you have to prove why content should be included, it's not a default to keeping it when multiple editors have removed it. Multiple users have removed the links, and you keep reinserting them. That's not a consensus. VanTucky 00:22, 6 March 2008 (UTC)
A quick Google search on 'merino livestock guardian llama' returns 2,840 hits. That's not a small number. This is obviously used in the Merino sheep industry. --BlindEagletalk~contribs 13:35, 6 March 2008 (UTC)
VanTucky, I must diagree with your personal attack regarding your last edit summary. I can understand if you are not for including certain content within the article and I am all for debate and discussion regarding this. However, according to your edit summary, consensus is against me and you appear to be the one instigating it. Why are you against me? --BlindEagletalk~contribs 14:22, 6 March 2008 (UTC)
BlindEagle - nobody is against you, but two editors disagree with the inclusion of guard llama's in this article. You are the only editor insisting that this be included. That means that you do NOT have concensus. In fact, there is concensus to remove that See Also link. Despite the ongoing discussion, you continually revert the article to your version. Nobody is denying that llama's may be used to guard merinos, just that having that information in this article does NOT improve the article - whereas it might improve some other articles, which has already been suggested to you. Please remove that link and stop reverting this article to include it. If you do not remove the link, either VanTucky or I will have to seek mediation from an administrator; or you are free to do the same. Thanks Bob98133 (talk) 14:51, 6 March 2008 (UTC)
I completely agree with Bob. This isn't about you BlindEagle, it's about the content. In addition the things Bob notes above, I want to point out something you very well know: Google hits are not an acceptable argument in content disputes. They may be a helpful barometer at times, but they are not a reliable source and they don't contradict a consensus of editors. VanTucky 23:09, 6 March 2008 (UTC)
BlindEagle - Put wikepedia first. Charles Esson (talk) 11:02, 8 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Swedish mulseing blowup

I've added a short note under animal welfare, looks like it is going to become important, perhaps more can be said.Charles Esson (talk) 11:02, 8 March 2008 (UTC). Put back in link to dispute over bribery claims, need for NPV. Charles Esson (talk) 08:11, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] This should surely be within striking distance of GA at least. Nice job

'nuff said. Cheers, Casliber (talk ยท contribs) 22:48, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

I'll second that, it nice seeing stuff getting better. Charles Esson (talk) 08:33, 17 April 2008 (UTC)