Talk:Akita (dog breed)/Archive 2

Archive 1

Archive 2

Dueling photos

I have now twice reverted the substitution of a less-good photo in the infobox for this article. I won't revert again without discussing this here, so here are my thoughts.

The photo in the infobox before today was this:

user:Owned4itall has now twice today tried to replace that photo with this:

File:JynxSmall.jpg

While the latter photo is not bad, it seems abundantly clear to me that the former one does a better job of showing the dog's shape and posture, which are important to the understanding of this article. The latter photo has paws cut off and the dog at an angle, as well as a leash and someone's foot. If there were no better photo candidate, the second photo would be a fine start, but given that we have the first one available to us, it seems a step down to use a poorer-quality photo instead. Opinions? keɪɑtɪk flʌfi (talk) 19:53, 13 September 2010 (UTC)

Breed Separation Debate - History

I added some further references to this section as well as making mention of the Australian and New Zealand Kennel Club stand points on the debate. Keetanii (talk) 11:36, 8 March 2011 (UTC)

Breed Temperament and Breed Specific Legislation

I don't know if anyone wants to mention it, but unfortunately this is another of the breeds being targeted by some countries legislation for breed bans, please see Breed Specific Legislation including (apparently) New York USA, Bermuda, Ireland ("Japanese Akita" specified) & Singapore. Keetanii (talk) 21:50, 31 March 2011 (UTC)

I have removed the incorrect tone marker from the temperament section. Not sure why it was there in the first place. Having read many books on the breed, the tone and content seem very correct and follow breed standards suggestions. However it still needs alot more work (and citations). Keetanii (talk) 23:38, 3 April 2011 (UTC)

New Sections

Added new sections that are commonly being used in other dog breed articles. Added some more photos. Keetanii (talk) 11:34, 3 April 2011 (UTC)

I also added the Famous Akitas section as it is also becoming more commonly used in Dog Breed pages. It may be of interest to people and is specific to the breed, so I see no reason not to include it. Keetanii (talk) 23:40, 3 April 2011 (UTC)

History

Not sure that the History should date any further back than the Akita inu (Japanese Akita) - American Akita breed split, since the history will be mainly Japanese akitas and 'should' already be in the Akita Inu page. I'm looking for peoples thoughts how to deal with these two pages since most of the information is the same. Cheers, Keetanii (talk) 11:34, 3 April 2011 (UTC)

The Mitagi dog is not mentioned in this article at all. The use of Hochiko to bolser the employer in per war Japan is interesting and probably should be noted. I think that the history could be a lot more expansive. See Kimura, Tatsuo. "A History Of The Akita Dog". Akita Learning Center. Retrieved May 6, 2011. which is a very scholarly and highly footnoted article. I also suggest that article as being used as support for a lot more propositions than we have used it so far, as it is one of the best on line resources I found. 7&6=thirteen (☎) 14:07, 19 May 2011 (UTC)

Photos Needed

Could reallly use some nice Akita photos, some different colors would be nice. Also really need a picture of a long coated AMERICAN Akita, the current tone is unfortunatly an Akita Inu (the only one I could find at the time). If you have any, please upload to the wikipedia commons http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Upload , category "American Akita". Keetanii (talk) 23:13, 5 April 2011 (UTC)

Have you considered looking through CC flickr images? These can be uploaded to Wikimedia Commons, but need to be checked by special users/bots/admins over there first to make sure they really are licensed under Creative Commons: American Akita CC images Flickr file guidelines — anndelion ※ 00:25, 6 April 2011 (UTC)

Thanks, yep, already uploaded two but they are the same dog LOL. Hard finding any others that are CC-BY, CC-BY-SA or Public Domain. I found a few of my own and uploaded them (hoping I did it right :P) The quality ism't 100% since they are old, were not taken with a digital camera and were scanned into the computer. (There are more of these that I uploaded that I have not used) If people get better ones, feel free to replace :) Keetanii (talk) 07:41, 6 April 2011 (UTC)

Still really need a photo of long coat American Akita - Keetanii (talk) 07:41, 30 April 2011 (UTC)

EDIT: Removed image request for long coat American Akita.Keetanii (talk) 08:49, 9 May 2011 (UTC)

Photo Rationale

• the image for the tool/info box, because it is by far the best image of an American Akita available on Wikicommons at the moment.
• the brindle [Akita Inu] to show the difference between the breeds, which not so long ago were considered the same breed.
• the long coated (also brindle) [Akita Inu] to show what a long coated Akita looks like. I would LOVE to replace this with an American Akita long coat photo.
• one adult male
• one adult female
• one puppy (I swapped the old one which had drop ears (probably due to teething) for the one currently, but if people want to swap back, that is fine. However I believe the one I posted is more typical of the breed)

Keetanii (talk) 13:36, 20 April 2011 (UTC)

Thankyou whoever found the long coat American Akita photo! Also I reverted the akita pup picture, if anyone wishes to explain their rationale for the drop eared puppy being a better candidate please do so. Keetanii (talk) 03:45, 9 May 2011 (UTC)

Reverted it again. caption left was "I was here first", reported as vandalism. I am more than happy for the 4 month old akita picture to be replaced with one as long as it is a better representation of the breed. The old one, as I previously stated is not typical of the breed. All breed standards state that non-pricked ears is a fault. Keetanii (talk) 05:55, 10 May 2011 (UTC)

120 stone Yezo Brown bear?

This seems improbable to me. 1680 lbs. avoirdupois? Isn't one Imperial stone with 14 lbs.? That's an incredibly big bear. 7&6=thirteen (☎) 00:32, 30 April 2011 (UTC)

I agree, actually I only remember seeing that pop up in the article recently. Looking for references/more reasonable story. - Keetanii (talk) 03:31, 30 April 2011 (UTC)

I found where the person got the information and have cited it. They must have thought that pound and stone were equal. - Keetanii (talk) 04:05, 30 April 2011 (UTC)

Yezo Brown bears are not in Honshu. They are only in Hokkaido. Not only that, there's no elks and antelopes in Japan. The sentence is a total mistake. I'll correct it. Oda Mari (talk) 06:09, 9 May 2011 (UTC)

Haha Thanks Oda, I'm not sure where the original story of Akitas hunting bears comes from, but I do see it alot, never cited though. Keetanii (talk) 08:48, 9 May 2011 (UTC)

Future section

Not sure what to do with this section. Noone can predict the future. It never seemed very "encyclopedic" to me. Vote to remove it? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Keetanii (talk • contribs) 03:35, 30 April 2011 (UTC)

I'm in favor of removing it; there's no need for a section on the breed's future and someone's opinion on the two types competing or whatever else.

I noticed what may be plagiarism in the history section -- you may want to look into it. It looks like it was added by one IP address in 2006, and I don't think the sites that the text is appearing on are taking it from WP, though I may be mistaken. – anna 09:52, 30 April 2011 (UTC)

Deleted future section Keetanii (talk) 00:53, 1 May 2011 (UTC)

Akita stamps

As for this addition. the citation looks like a commercial site and is not a WP:RS. The page says "Buy! Buy! Buy!". If it's an EL, it should be removed per WP:ELNO. I think the page should not be used as a ref. Oda Mari (talk) 10:00, 6 May 2011 (UTC)

I removed it before seeing this. Regardless of how promotional it is — I do think commercial sites are okay as references in certain situations — their list contains many breeds. There's nothing noteworthy about the existence of Akita stamps. – anna 12:42, 6 May 2011 (UTC)

I am a bit worried about the new comment under the Akita stamp about Tachibana. Where is the reference to this (I'm really interested!!! :D). The Stamp page given states that it is of Hachi-ko. Quote:"This stamp was originally issued in 1953 and is listed as an Akita Dog named Hachi-Ko. It was reissued in 1989 with essentially the same design, but with the addition of "Nippon" on it." Keetanii (talk) 23:55, 6 May 2011 (UTC)

Edit to say I found a mention on a blog, but that is all I have found so far. I went to revert it to it's old position and caption but I can't find it in the history. Keetanii (talk) 00:06, 7 May 2011 (UTC)

The Commons picture itself says it was issued August 25, 1953.

I also strongly disagree with the notion that the animal stamps web site is a "blog", and while I recognize that it is a place that wants to sell things, the information seems both informative and accurate. Indeed, the use of commemorative animal pictures (which have almost 'universal' appeal -- much wider and bigger than the citizens of the country issuing the stamps) to spur sales of stamps that will never be used for actual postage on mailings is a notable marketing scheme and a way to fatten governmental postal budgets (without actually having to provide the paid for service). That you don't find any of that notable is a comment about your own predilections. Like beauty, notability is "in the eye of the beholder". 7&6=thirteen (☎) 02:03, 7 May 2011 (UTC)

FWIW, I had merely moved the stamp picture from the Akita Inu article to this article, and added the 1953 date. The named of the dog may be wrong, it could be Chiharu as reported in this article in the "Morie Sawataishi: Saviour of Japan's Akita Samurai dog". London Daily Telegraph. December 11, 2008. {{cite news}}: Unknown parameter |accessdaate= ignored (help) which refers to 'Dog Man: An Uncommon Life on a Faraway Mountain’ by Martha Sherrill is published by Penguin USA. I am not wedded to the name, and would suggest that this is a good source. You can find more if you google "Japanese 1953 akita stamp". 7&6=thirteen (☎) 02:11, 7 May 2011 (UTC)

No, it says nothing about my own predilections. My thoughts can be summed up as follows: "when all popular breeds have a page on a site, there's nothing particularly remarkable about the Akita being among them". Your entire message strikes me as irrelevant, frankly, but maybe I'm too dense to understand what you were trying to get at.

I was commenting on the sentence about Akitas having had "many" stamps, not about a specific stamp, in case that was unclear. – anna 02:17, 7 May 2011 (UTC)

Woah, sorry Thirteen, I didn't mean the akita stamps page was a blog, I meant that I found mention of the name (tachibana) on a blog. Also I have not gotten around to editing the Akita Inu Page, I wouldn't currently trust information just because it came from there. Cheers, Keetanii (talk) 03:22, 7 May 2011 (UTC) Edit:What I mean is that when I came originally to wikipedia it was becauseof the mis-information in these two pages, so I purposly have left the akita inu page alone until we could get this one with fully referenced information. (didn't want to sound arrogant there LOL) Keetanii (talk) 03:42, 7 May 2011 (UTC)

That they have been artistically depicted in postage stamps is itself noteworthy. But like beauty, relevancy and noteworthiness is a personal predilection. That you don't regard it in the same way as I does not make you 'wrong.' But I think that the Daily Telegraph mentions this stamp makes it noteworthy. You are free to disagree. Happy editing. 7&6=thirteen (☎) 02:27, 7 May 2011 (UTC)

Without looking into it in great detail, I'd tend to agree about the specific stamp -- my only point was that many stamps in general may not be necessary to include, since various countries release dog breed series. Just check out the page of another breed on there, like the Borzoi or Japanese Chin. My viewpoint, of course, and others are bound to disagree (I like the stamps, certainly). – anna 02:36, 7 May 2011 (UTC)

I put in references about the specific stamp. I am not being didactic or trying to be a WP:dick about the singular notability of Akitas having a stamp compared to other breeds. As I pointed out above, the creation of these stamps is a Ponzi scheme that preys on the sentimentality of suckers like me. But they are some pretty stamps that appeal to collectors, and that this (including depicting Akitas) ia part of a big postal indusry. 7&6=thirteen (☎) 03:05, 7 May 2011 (UTC)

I changed the caption on the stamp photo, (being bold as I am) since we now have three names for the dog pictured, (including tachibana, chiharu and hachiko) and really I'm not sure how important it is to say what the dogs name is, if the references cannot even be clear on the subject. It is enough (in my view) to show the picture of a post war akita of japanese type. We don't need to try to work every sceric of Akita related information into the page, especially when the information is disputed. :) Keetanii (talk) 03:33, 7 May 2011 (UTC) P.S. Come on, please be nice to each other guys, when I read the comment about "That you don't find any of that notable is a comment about your own predilections" I was quite hurt. Keetanii (talk) 03:42, 7 May 2011 (UTC)

It's Tachibana. Chiharu is the name of her grandmother. Read the telegraph page throughly. There's a sentence "...an open-air yard where the no-name granddaughter of Chiharu could sit in the sun...". You can see the original photo of the stamp on this Akita breeder's page, English, probably a machine translation, is very poor though. The image matches the description of the dog in the Telegraph story:"...see the puppy. Her fur was flecked brown and black and grey. Her ears and mask were black, as was the beauty mark on her left cheek." Here are some dog stamps in Japan on this page. Hachiko's stamp is #2. Oda Mari (talk) 08:09, 7 May 2011 (UTC)

Oh good, ok I'll fix that. Thanks, Keetanii (talk) 08:20, 7 May 2011 (UTC)

Breed specific books

In "Further reading", we might want to add a list of breed specific books. I note that most of them are listed in the link to the Bibliography in that section, however. 7&6=thirteen (☎) 13:19, 19 May 2011 (UTC)

Merger proposal: July 2011

MERGED:

Merge done. American Akita renamed, so article contains that history. Akita Inu is a redirect here - no history merge done. Text copied and pasted from User:Keetanii/sandbox2. SilkTork ^{✔Tea time} 15:03, 4 September 2011 (UTC)

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

It is proposed that American Akita and Akita Inu be merged into Akita (dog), which currently is a redirect to Akita Inu. Potential advantages of the proposed merge include one version of: the history of the dog(s) up to 1945; comparison of size and appearance; the differences of opinion between Kennel Clubs and the different dogshow criteria; the dog(s)' similar behaviour; their veterinary issues; and avoiding the WP:POV issue in the one-sided redirect. --Philcha (talk) 21:28, 4 July 2011 (UTC)

Shared heritage, some shared mortality and morbidity, but quite distinct breeds at this point. OPPOSE merger. 7&6=thirteen (☎)

Currently I support the merger. The problem is though that the amount of overlap between information on the two breeds is more than the perhaps few paragraphs difference. While working the American Akita page for GA, all of it was suitable to be copy pasted to Akita Inu with different photos. I think it may be worth trying a combined page for the two which outlines the differences and similarities in the one place. This way the reader will never be confused which Akita they are reading about. The only thing really distinct about the breeds at the moment is the allowable colours and a very slight size difference. Give me a chance to make the proposed page in a sandbox and then have another think about it? I'm sorry I've been a bit lax, I have a very sick dog to look after at the moment, but will be back on the issue once my girl is healthy again. Cheers Keetanii (talk) 07:20, 12 July 2011 (UTC)

Okay, here is a sample merged article. Akita (dog) sandbox Keetanii (talk) 04:30, 15 July 2011 (UTC)

I think the sandbox article looks great and don't see any problems with the proposed merger as both are given equal treatment in the article. We hope (talk) 02:45, 13 August 2011 (UTC)

I support the merger per nom. Oda Mari (talk) 05:15, 13 August 2011 (UTC)

I'm also in favor of a merger -- seems to be the most sensible option. Anna (talk) 05:35, 13 August 2011 (UTC)

Happy to support the merger, and the new article is probably good to go for a GA nomination pretty much straight away (only thing I'd suggest is to look at the extenal links at the moment per the WP:ELNO guidelines). Good job. Miyagawa (talk) 06:52, 13 August 2011 (UTC)

Merging procedure

If the merge goes ahead, I suggest per Help:Merging:

• Remove the #REDIRECT from Akita (dog)
• Copy one version (American Akita or Akita Ini) into Akita (dog), and replace the original copy with a redirect using {{R from merge}} - see instructions at {tl|R from merge}}. The original text must be be gone - see Help:Merging about copyright issues.
• {{Copied}} for both original Talk pages, so that further discussion is directed to Talk:Akita (dog)
• Keep the other Akita version in a subpage, as including the 2nd version will be a combination of additions - rather fiddly work.
• Completely replace the article about the other original other Akita and redirect with using {{R from merge}}.
• Paste and merge text, a bit at a time, from the other 2nd Akita version (subpage) into the the merged article. I suggest you use {{inuse}} at the top of the article (and save to make it effective!) to avoid edit conflicts - and removed {{inuse}} at the eend of the editing sessions. --Philcha (talk) 17:09, 15 August 2011 (UTC)
• Kill the subpage and
• Remove the DAB page entry from Akita (dog) --Philcha (talk) 17:13, 15 August 2011 (UTC)

Using this procedure leaves history in all three articles: live content in Akita (dog) and under redirects at Akita Inu and American Akita. Since there is currently little meaningful history in Akita (dog), it could be speedied G6 and one of the original articles can be moved over it, so the history is split over only two pages. Flatscan (talk) 04:46, 23 August 2011 (UTC)

---

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page, such as the current discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Two last pictures needed

Picture of Helen Keller with Akita. Picture of Helen Keller with Akita. There are several others at Google Images. Anybody got one for Commons? Helen Keller at Wikimedia Commons 7&6=thirteen (☎) 15:45, 4 October 2011 (UTC)

Neither this article not the Hachikō article have a picture of the bronzed statue. Bronze of Hachikō We need one of those in Commons, too. 7&6=thirteen (☎) 16:21, 4 October 2011 (UTC)

Mountain Dog?

Why are we saying it's a mountain dog? It's a spitz or primitive dog, as the article also says. The reference doesn't say that. I think I'll change it. Chrisrus (talk) 16:21, 12 December 2011 (UTC)

See {{cite web |url=//ezinearticles.com/?What-Is-An-Akita-Dog?&id=5147161 |title=What Is An Akita Dog? |first1=Michael |last1=Bean |accessdate=12 December 2011}} Unfortunately, this seems to be getting caught by a "spam filter notice".</ref> I removed the "http:" from the citation, so that I can try to get around the filter.

Part of the larger problem stems from the consolidation of the two articles. You are more right than not about the Akita Inu, but the American Akita is a different story. 7&6=thirteen (☎) 18:03, 12 December 2011 (UTC)

See also Cantrell, Simon (March 29, 2011). "Ten Best Breeds For Guard Dogs: American Akita". Retrieved 12 December 2011. "99 Kinds of The Most Popular Dogs and Pictures". Retrieved 12 December 2011. 7&6=thirteen (☎) 18:45, 12 December 2011 (UTC)

Please read Mountain Dog. Akitas do come from the mountains, but that doesn't make them Mountain dogs as defined in the link in this article. Chrisrus (talk) 19:07, 12 December 2011 (UTC)

Move discussion in progress

There is a move discussion in progress on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Dogs which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. —RMCD bot 05:45, 17 June 2014 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 2 external links on Akita (dog). Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20090805065155/http://www.allanimaleyes.com:80/diseases.html to http://www.allanimaleyes.com/diseases.html#glaucoma
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20090805065155/http://www.allanimaleyes.com:80/diseases.html to http://www.allanimaleyes.com/diseases.html#pra

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

Y An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

• 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.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 15:39, 15 January 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 7 external links on Akita (dog). 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:

• Corrected formatting/usage for http://akitanodog.info/
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120111063721/http://www.nyc.gov/html/nycha/downloads/pdf/j09apre.pdf to http://www.nyc.gov/html/nycha/downloads/pdf/j09apre.pdf
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.akita-inu.com/health.htm
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130424063817/http://ankc.org.au/Breed_Details.aspx?bid=237 to http://www.ankc.org.au/Breed_Details.aspx?bid=237
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110316145111/http://www.ankc.org.au/Breed_Details.aspx?bid=156 to http://www.ankc.org.au/Breed_Details.aspx?bid=156
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110524175126/http://www.nzkc.org.nz/br601.html to http://www.nzkc.org.nz/br601.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110524175231/http://www.nzkc.org.nz/br637.html to http://www.nzkc.org.nz/br637.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

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) 03:35, 29 June 2017 (UTC)

Untitled

I’ve noticed in the introduction paragraphs there are no citations given but the reader is presented with a lot of facts. These facts should be backed up with the citations. I also check a couple of the citation links and quite a few referring to the colors of an Akita, lead me to a single view web page that looks like it could’ve been made by anyone, it doesn’t include an other or any references of its own, and could easily not be correct information. This article could also be organized a little bit better, the section called “Description” could use a better title, it contains a few title sub titles like appearance, coat types, and grooming needs. I think Appearance should be the main titles, as well as the grooming needs matched with the specific coat type. Cooperol (talk) 22:19, 12 September 2016 (UTC)