Talk:Ardennais

Assorted commentary

I find it really, really weird that the breed bans blacks but takes bays. You cannot genetically get to bay without a black base coat. What they must be trying to promote is homozygousity for the Agouti gene that suppresses black to the points, and is masked in chestnuts, which have no black. Weird. Montanabw^(talk) 06:56, 30 August 2009 (UTC)

Yeah, I'm not sure what's up with that. The sad thing is that the breed is so rare that the breed registries are barely active and have no websites. I'm not even sure if the Great Britain registry is still in existance, and all I can find on the European registries is a physical address from several years ago. There's nothing in the US except for a couple of Yahoo groups that claim to be the beginnings of registries. W/e - more work for when I get home... Dana boomer (talk) 17:27, 30 August 2009 (UTC)

Ask Richard New Forest. He may know something...he's our UK critters guy. Montanabw^(talk) 06:32, 31 August 2009 (UTC)

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Ardennes (horse)/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Will begin soon a review. Queries below. Casliber (talk · contribs) 06:37, 13 September 2009 (UTC)

• I must admit, the article leaves me hanging and curious to know why black is verboten...
  • I have not be able to find anything more out about this. Several of the references I use state that black is excluded from registration, but they give no reason for this exclusion...
    • Aah well, that'd be good to find out for FA then. Might require some concerted digging.

• Also, any more to add or link on eating them for meat?
  • I added a link to horse meat. Is there extra information that you are looking for in particular? Many draft breeds are used for meat, especially in Europe.
    • Interesting, was not aware of horse consumption in Europe. I am undecided. A line about the widespread consumption of horsemeat in Belgium and France might be worthwhile but not a deal-breaker.

• No genetic diseases etc.? okay then
  • As far as I can find, there are no genetic diseases specific to this breed.
• The caesar stuff is intriguing, has there been any DNA research into it? Big claim.... all helps
  • Added a bit more on the Caesar stuff that I'd was able to find. Nothing on DNA research, but an extra reference. Also, can't find anything that says it's not true.

Overall, not looking too bad, prose is okay. Just trying to look at some comprehensiveness queries above and will then rate it. I am sure it will get over the line this time through. Casliber (talk · contribs) 14:22, 13 September 2009 (UTC)

This is a really rare breed, so I really have included everything in this article that I have been able to find on them. I have replied to the first three comments above, and will do some more digging on the Caesar stuff tonight - hopefully to get a response to you by tomorrow morning. Thanks for the review! Dana boomer (talk) 00:31, 15 September 2009 (UTC)

Added a bit more on the last bullet. There's not really much else out there on this breed. If you have more sources that you can find, I'd be glad to include them, but I am fairly sure that I've done an extensive search and pulled most or all of the reliable references that exist. Any more thoughts? Dana boomer (talk) 00:10, 16 September 2009 (UTC)

• Okay, as a final note, I think we're over the line GA-wise. Maybe just ringing the Ardennes society or emailing them in Belgium would be useful. The only other thing might be a line or two on the daughter breeds - expanding a little on when, where and why bred. Casliber (talk · contribs) 03:44, 16 September 2009 (UTC)

I'm in late here, but the history thing will need a little tweaking -- mostly phrasing to clarify that the ancient horses are the ancestors of the breed, not the breed itself. It's been an issue across at least five other horse articles that, no matter what the registry claims, nobody kept written pedigrees in Europe until the 13th or 14th century, so while the type may be very ancient, the "breed" can only be traced back as far as documentation can be located. Not a derail o GA if the article is otherwise qualified, but definitely a nuance worth refining. Montanabw^(talk) 03:56, 16 September 2009 (UTC)

Good point, now you mention it. Even some background info like how breeds are recorded'd be helpful too. I find that lot with some of the smaller articles, that some context can be very helpful (as in where I have mentioned a few times above). Casliber (talk · contribs) 04:16, 16 September 2009 (UTC)

Not relevant to this GA run but breed associations that claim that their breed is the REAL proto horse that has been bred perfectly pure since the dawn of time stuff is just rampant. And folks into this thinking can get really nutty on the topic. Poor Dana had to deal with that in the Sorraia article too. Montanabw^(talk) 05:30, 16 September 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for the GA pass! I've added a bit more on the horse meat thing in Europe, plus done some tweaking to the history section. I've added a bit of information on daughter breeds, although I'm not sure if I may now be using "draft horse" or variations on the theme too many times. I'm not planning on taking this article to FAC, at least at this time - too short, too many unknowns about the breed. Thanks again! Dana boomer (talk) 19:46, 16 September 2009 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Ardennes horse. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20111223075350/http://archive.defra.gov.uk/foodfarm/farmanimal/movements/horses/documents/horse-passports.pdf to http://archive.defra.gov.uk/foodfarm/farmanimal/movements/horses/documents/horse-passports.pdf

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 11:14, 17 October 2016 (UTC)