Talk:Bully Kutta/Archive 1

Archive 1

Long list of external photo links

Wikipedia isn't a link farm--that means that articles can have external links to sites that are particularly relevant and helpful to people to get more info on the subject, but not to *every* site that has the slightest info about the topic. Would be better to have one or two links to pages from which one can reach multiple photos, rather than to individual photos with no other info. I reduced the list to one of each of the 3 dogs; don't know whether those are the best shots of each, that's up to someone else to decide. Elf | Talk 22:34, 8 September 2005 (UTC)

Note to Elf

Pictures and info on this breed are difficult to obtain, this is why they were added. There are not books or hardcopy literature published on this breed, this article is really the best reference point for someone doing research on the breed. I spent time sniffing everything available on the Internet. Please stop editing everything I do...if it wasn't for your sexuality I would begin to believe u have puppy luv for me :)

If you would ever bother to look at Wikipedia:WikiProject Dog breeds to see how dog-breed articles are organized, or for that matter any of the hundreds of other dog breed pages, and if you would learn from the changes that other people (ok, mostly me) are making to your pages, I wouldn't have to spend my time editing so many of your additions. However, as you may also have noticed if you bothered to look, I'm active on all dog-related and dog-breed related pages, attempting to hold together a strategy and consistency that has been developed by a number of people active in the dog-breed project over the last couple of years, which you seem to have no interest in. May I remind you again that Wikipedia is a collaborative effort, not a place where an individual can go and do whatever he wants in any way he wants to do it. Elf | Talk 00:51, 9 September 2005 (UTC)

These new edits are acceptable and it is good that everyone is following the same format. There are a lot of rules at the Wiki not everyone will know them in depth, in fact, I suspect it is only the few that know them at all. Cordially WritersCramp 01:21, 9 September 2005 (UTC)

True. And true. But most people who do much work here do learn a lot of the basics fairly quickly. I do not want to discourage you from contributing, because there are so many many many dog breeds and you're filling in a lot of rare ones. Not that I think you'd be easily discouraged. Elf | Talk 04:02, 9 September 2005 (UTC)

Long list of photo links again

WC, as you've now been told by two people, the long list of external links is definitely not what Wikipedia is about. It would be "acceptable" (to use your term) to have an external link to a single page from which one could then access the various photos. It would be "acceptable" to pick 2 or 3 photos to link to, since we know that this breed will be hard to find photos of. But there is no reason that I can think of to have links to that many photos. We certainly wouldn't include that many photos ON the page even if they were public domain. Please either find the external page that one can use to get to those photos and put a link to that here, or pick 2 or 3 photos to link to (and maybe also then link to a page where one can get to other photos. But having this many links is very clearly nonWikipedian. Them simply being "difficult to obtain" doesn't make something so important that it has to be in wikipedia. Especially since they're all of the same dogs over & over. Also, the dogs' names need to be removed from the article. It has been the Dog Breed Project standard not to identify dogs by name in the articles about the breed unless there is some exceptional reason to do so, which pretty much never happens. I certainly don't see it in this case. Elf | Talk 01:55, 11 September 2005 (UTC)

To clarify what I'm doing here: I'm reducing the links in this article to one image link per sub-breed. This is gives Wikipedia useful access to valuable information, but avoids making the page into an unreadable mass of links. We don't need a huge pile of links to inform the reader of this article, and Wikipedia is not a collection of links. -Harmil 03:19, 11 September 2005 (UTC)

42 inches?

Just a question on this: the maximum height for the Bully Kutta is given as 42 inches. Is there citation for this? The Irish Wolfhound is generally considered the tallest breed, and it is described as 32-34 inches tall. Is 42 inches the height at the withers, or top of the head? Is this possibly an error converting from metric to inches?

Well, as I'm the only one who's actually read my point, let me quote from the first link, Molosserworld, which states that the dogs are: "30 to 34 inches (76-85,5 cm.) for males and 29 to 32 inches (73,5-81,5 cm.) for females."

Pic SirIsaacBrock 20:44, 29 May 2006 (UTC)

Further research

I have done more research on this issue and believe that my initial analysis is wrong. The sites used as referece, by ther eown claims here state that "You may find some of the information published here to be different from what you will read in breed books, published encyclopedias and on other websites. We do not distort the information but rather state our perspective on the breeds based on our research and contributed information". This does not appear to be a very reliable sources. I will replace the references tag as I feel these issues need to be addressed. -- Chrislk02 (Chris Kreider) 18:17, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

I am surprised to see that my article was shamelessly copied from what I have donated to www.moloss.com. Kindly verify your sources and atleast have the decency to take my and Mr.Kaare Konradsen's permission to publish them in here. Regards, Sumann Gon Email: sumanngon@hotmail.com

Reliable References

This article does not have a reference section. External links are not equivalent to a reference section. There is not a single in-text citation for this article. Thus, the Primary Sources tag. Removing the tag without fixing this problem is considered by most editors to be vandalism. I left a more detailed message concerning this on User:Headphonos talk page a few days ago. Keesiewonder ^talk Time/date stamp for this post is 20:43 February 13, 2007. Not sure why it didn't get listed. Keesiewonder ^talk 22:49, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

There are 2 references listed. The one [1] is not an appropriate reference. The other one that was removed, [2] is a much better reference and I do not see a problem citing it as such. However, there is a large amount of content in the article that appears to be orginial research (i.e., i could not find it in the artilces listed for references). If those got cited, I see no problem with this article. -- Chrislk02 (Chris Kreider) 17:42, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

I have cleaned upo the linkspam section and the reference section. I added another reference. Neither reference is from a spam site or a forum where. They are from sites that specialize in interest in Molosser breeds of dogs. I see no major issue with these sites as a reference. Sure, there could be better reference but there could also be much worse ones as well (i found a whole bunch that WOULDENT be acceptable with a google search on the topic). I am going to remove the primary references tag. If there is an issue with this, please let me know. -- Chrislk02 (Chris Kreider) 18:01, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

Pictures linked

I am also removing the links to the external pictures per WP:EL, Wikipedia:External_links#What_should_be_linked has nothing related to pictures beiung linked, only articles. Please try to find a free image and upload it for inclusion on the article. If you need help doing this, I would be glad to help, please contact me on my user talk page. -- Chrislk02 (Chris Kreider) 13:09, 16 February 2007 (UTC)

Note to WritersCramp

Please stop using revert to undo edits. Revert is to remove vandalism such as anonymous users coming in and writing crap in articles such as "my dog is a nice dog" or various profanities or inexplicable edits such as removing half a paragraph. It is not for working collaboratively with other wiki editors. I've already given reasons for the edits on the page. If you disagree, please discuss them. Do not use revert. Elf | Talk 00:27, 9 September 2005 (UTC)

"When not fed properly they have been known to prey on their owners." Haha! Freddy where's Jason?? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 124.184.228.4 (talk) 06:57, 10 December 2007 (UTC)

Human Meat

Hi, I was just wondering if anyone can help me with something that has stuck in my head ever since I had first heard of this breed. I would just like to know is it true that these dogs have been known to prey on their owners when hungry? TeePee-20.7 08:48, 4 October 2007 (UTC)

copy and paste?

Bwrs (talk) 13:51, 2 October 2008 (UTC)

External links section

There are sevearl external links which I feel are unreliable, spam, or add no value to this article. It is important that all external links in wikipedia articles be reliable, not spam and add value to the article. User:Headphonos, disagress with my removal of these links and blindly replaced them. For the sake of resolving the dispute whine maintaining the integrity of wikipedia, I have reinstated the orignial references section that I added, and have removed several links listed below for the reasons listed below.

• Molosser World - This link adds no value to the article. There is no useful content
• Beasts from the East - from a freewebs hosting site. Unreliable, unverifiable information.
• Top Dawg Kennels - From a tripod website, as stated above. unverifiable, unreliable.

The link to [[*MBK, I have no issue with and am leaving in the article

I would be glad to sort through this with any interested parties. Please feel free to cotnact me on my user talk page. -- Chrislk02 (Chris Kreider) 12:38, 16 February 2007 (UTC)

• Thanks, Chrislk02. I'd like to discuss, but am going out of town for about 10 days. Will check back later. Keesiewonder ^talk 14:55, 16 February 2007 (UTC)

I am surprised to see that my article was shamelessly copied from what I have donated to www.moloss.com. Kindly verify your sources and atleast have the decency to take my and Mr.Kaare Konradsen's permission to publish them in here. Regards, Sumann Gon Email: sumanngon@hotmail.com —Preceding unsigned comment added by 122.167.183.6 (talk) 11:59, 9 March 2009 (UTC)

44 inches!?

NO these dogs are NOT 44 inches tall. Maybe on the top of the head but at the shoulder NO WAY! irish wolfhounds are the tallest along with the great dane. This article is SERIUOSLY biased and unless there is good references and not just some editing by a guy who is obsessed with these mutt, I'll delete the entire article. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.66.27.162 (talk) 06:30, 22 July 2009 (UTC)

Wiki page on Bully Kutta

Hello, the wiki page on bully kutta has been vandlised by Ukbullyk (talk · contribs), he has deleted all words about the origin of bully kutta in india. Even the photo of bully kutta which has been uploaded by an indian has been now incorrectly labelled as "Pakistani Mastiff" by Ukbullyk (talk · contribs). The said user has been known to use verbal abuse against other members who have corrected the inaccuracies. The information regarding the height of the bully kutta dog added by Ukbullyk (talk · contribs)are ridiculous which points to the fact that this has been added by a person who has never seen a bully kutta dog before. I request you keep to revert the page to last correct version edited by 59.92.233.197. Thanks

Your vandalism has been removed the sources clearly state Pakistani mastiff stop your persistent vandalism please 109.150.59.99 (talk) 18:07, 11 February 2012 (UTC)

Everywhere these dogs are known as Pakistani Mastiffs and they are not available in India and Original breeders are in Pakistan only so stop vandalizing this article and calling it an Indian Mastiff. Pakistan is now a separate country and anything within its boundaries is now a Pakistani. Kindly Stop vandalizing the article by painting it Indian when you cannot found any of these dogs In India — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2001:638:904:FFC5:207:E9FF:FE2F:BBCB (talk) 22:33, 22 July 2012 (UTC)

Why so many pictures of the same dog?

I have noticed that some images on this page are repetetive of the same dog, i don't think we need 4 images of the same dog on this article. It is best to show images of different dogs with different color variations and so on. Just my opinion. --Ltshears (talk) 00:37, 31 July 2012 (UTC)

-- Also , why was the info box removed? it is standard for all page to have that info box on the top right corner. --Ltshears (talk) 00:44, 31 July 2012 (UTC)

Dispute

There is a dispute going on with this page in that one individual keeps deleting the entire info box and then putting up an image of their own dog. There is already an image of this dog on the page, please stop deleting the info box and please stop posting up multiple images of your dog. The one image of your dog is enough.Ltshears (talk) 05:31, 5 August 2012 (UTC)

Reliable sources

One of the core policies of Wikipedia is Wikipedia:Verifiability, which requires that information comes from "reliable sources"(see What_counts_as_a_reliable_source). I've removed "loveofbreeds.com" as ureliable. I'm uncertain about "iloveindia.com". Their disclaimer indicates that they "take utmost care regarding the correctness, authenticity, source and accuracy of the content/information provided on the site." but they don't list their staffs and articles don't identify their authors. beasts-from-the-east.webs.com/ seems like a personal website. Self-published sources are generally not allowed unless they are "produced by an established expert on the topic of the article whose work in the relevant field has previously been published by reliable third-party publications." Non-english sources can be used if no good English language sources are available.

Any info that does not come from "reliable sources" are not appropriate for Wikipedia. Unfortunately this means that obscure topics that do not have "reliable source" can't be covered comprehensively on Wikipedia. If you can find reliable sources to back up the information written in the article, please do so. If not, any editor can challenge the material and remove them for being unsourced.--Dodo bird (talk) 04:12, 7 August 2012 (UTC)

Assessment comment

The comment(s) below were originally left at Talk:Bully Kutta/Comments, and are posted here for posterity. Following several discussions in past years, these subpages are now deprecated. The comments may be irrelevant or outdated; if so, please feel free to remove this section.

The History and use section is confusing and seems to have little useful information in it. Hopefully someone more familiar with the subject can help clearing it up a bit. --87.94.25.156 (talk) 23:34, 18 March 2008 (UTC) Aish

Last edited at 23:34, 18 March 2008 (UTC). Substituted at 10:31, 29 April 2016 (UTC)

Requested move 9 July 2018

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: no consensus to move the page at this time, per the discussion below. I have created the proposed title as a redirect to the current article. Dekimasuよ! 18:21, 15 July 2018 (UTC)

---

Bully Kutta → Pakistani Bully – Common Name. Most reliable sources use this title. Current title is one of his various alternative names. See reliable sources in news. 119.160.97.225 (talk) 16:08, 9 July 2018 (UTC)

• Oppose unless someone presents better evidence of WP:COMMONNAME. Nominator states [m]ost reliable sources use this title, but I get far more Gnews (213 vs 97), Gbooks (724 vs 97), and Gscholar (9 vs 4) for "Bully Kutta" than "Pakistani Bully". Even "Pakistani Mastiff" is more common than "Pakistani Bully" in Gbooks, though less common in Gnews:
  • Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL
  • Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL
  • Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Of the sources cited in the article, the Times of India and Tribune India articles use the term "Pakistan/Pakistani Bully". (The first citation alludes to how that may be confusing or unfamiliar to some readers due to confusion with the English word "bully"). The other sources from outside of India, e.g. Europetnet and Washington Post, use "Bully Kutta" and/or "Pakistani Mastiff" but not "Pakistani Bully". But I haven't looked into this deeply and I'm no expert on dog breeds. 59.149.124.29 (talk) 03:12, 12 July 2018 (UTC)

---

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

Suppression of source

You are just trying to suppress the source and where the post in wiki itself is a fake one. This might be the reason nobody relies on Wikipedia. Aravindan24233 (talk) 20:07, 8 January 2019 (UTC)

Aravindan24233 - look at the section above this one. Yngvadottir is not trying to suppress anything, they are trying to start a conversation about what this article should say. I recognise that you are new to editing, but you are going to wear out other editors' patience with your continued assertions that we are trying to suppress anything. You have been copying and pasting from a Facebook page, which is not good practice; if you discuss the changes you want to make here, and present sources which we can rely upon, you will find that people are happy to discuss them with you. GirthSummit _(blether) 20:33, 8 January 2019 (UTC)

Alangu Mastiff

Alangu Mastiff redirects here but the name is not mentioned. There was an article at the title but it was deleted as a hoax; this page suggests it is a South Indian breed, but I found it by checking for possible copyvio origins for text that had been inserted here by Aravindan24233; the black triangles/caret marks introduced in this edit look like the result of copy and paste from the web. Is the Alangu Mastiff the same breed or a related one? Should information about it be included, or at least a boldface mention for readers coming to this article via the redirect, or should the redirect target be changed? Yngvadottir (talk) 20:03, 8 January 2019 (UTC)

Yngvadottir Hmm. Looking back through this history, it seems that the article referenced the Alangu Mastiff until this diff by KhaasBanda (who hasn't edited since 2016, so presumably won't chime in here). Perhaps a 'better source needed' tag would have been better than a removal - I agree that having a redirect to a page that doesn't mention the Alangu is far from ideal. Anyone object to a reintroduction of the mention? GirthSummit _(blether) 21:23, 8 January 2019 (UTC)

Looking at that page again, it suddenly starts calling them bully kuttas halfway down. This page also suggests the terms are used synonymously—and also Sindh Mastiff, which also redirects here—but seems to indicate they were originally not the same? I'm hesitant to base editing on such weak and unclear sources, and the most we can say really is that the Bully Kutta and the Alangu Mastiff are regarded as the same by some. It might help to know what the deleted article said; it might have had a useful source or at least some claims for the origin or description of the breed that would aid in searching. Yngvadottir (talk) 21:36, 8 January 2019 (UTC)

My understanding (from one of the various dubious sources I've looked at while investigating this) is that kutta is an Indian word for dog - so it's probably safe to assume that bully kutta is the same breed as bully dog. I agree that hedging the language for the other names would be safer - 'regarded the same by some' might work unless/until better sources are unearthed. Drmies might be willing to take a look at the deleted article with his admin hat on, although if it was deleted as a hoax I wouldn't hold my breath in hopes of finding good sources there. GirthSummit _(blether) 22:04, 8 January 2019 (UTC)

Yeah there was nothing. http://www.moloss.com/brd/il/i002// , but that's dead. The argument on the talk page was that Alangu was basically a hoax so that India would have a big dog too. Drmies (talk) 04:01, 9 January 2019 (UTC)

The history section from that site, archived in June 2010, distinguishes the Indian/Sindh Mastiff from the Bully Kutta (Dog), but doesn't mention the Alangu Mastiff, although it refers to the Alaunt. (Same text, at least in this respect, at its earliest archiving in 2004.) Given the name "Spanish Alaunt" for the Alano Español, my unsubstantiated hunch is that Alangu Mastiff should be redirected to Alaunt instead. Yngvadottir (talk) 05:48, 9 January 2019 (UTC)

Revert page to correct information

Urgent need to set this page right back to the stage were it had correct information http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Bully_Kutta&diff=324043233&oldid=323898496

The current page full of lies and half-truths