Talk:Dog/Choosing a dog

From Citizendium
Jump to: navigation, search
This article has a Citable Version.
Main Article
Discussion
Related Articles  [?]
Bibliography  [?]
External Links  [?]
Citable Version  [?]
Catalogs [?]
Choosing a dog [?]
 

Well done, I always thought "how to" knowledge is properly included in an encyclopedia. --Larry Sanger 21:50, 25 January 2007 (CST)

Didn't the first encyclopedias include several how-tos and practical guides? Shanya Almafeta 22:02, 25 January 2007 (CST)
I second LS's sentiments. I can hardly wait for the Choosing a cat article. I do volunteer work in a Humane Society shelter and just recently adopted a new cat James F. Perry 22:12, 25 January 2007 (CST)

Actually, Choosing a cat is coming up! But please, feel free to add in your comments right in the articles. Nancy Sculerati MD 22:21, 25 January 2007 (CST)

"Stores that sell puppies are usually a problematic source for a new dog. Unless the store has special arrangements with breeders, and is staffed by knowledgeable people who are trained in proper care, the other alternatives for finding a canine pet are considered more reliable."

This strikes me as biased; at least two constituencies, namely owners of stores and people who regularly patronize them, are likely to disagree. At the very least you could say why stores that sell puppies are "usually a problematic source for a new dog." The context implies that some stories sell any old mongrel (like the pound!) and are sometimes staffed by ignorant kids (like the pound as well!).

On a completely different subject, I wonder if I shouldn't adapt "Sanger's Guide to Learning Irish Fiddle" for CZ!--Larry Sanger 08:32, 28 January 2007 (CST)

I'm looking forward to it!Nancy Sculerati MD 08:34, 28 January 2007 (CST)

This is a fantastic topic to write about. Though perhaps I'm biased because I'm looking for a dog. :) --Mike Johnson 13:08, 29 January 2007 (CST)

Dissenting; different project altogether

I cannot speak to whether or not “how-tos” used to be included in encyclopaedias (I don't know), but they generally are not now. This is in no way a comment on the validity of how-to articles; that’s a valid but completely different project. These days, encyclopaedias answer “what is…?”

Further, with respect to choosing animals, the advice is either common sense “do not buy a Pekingese for boar-hunting”, extremely subjective “are Ragdolls better than British Shorthairs?”, biased “only buy a dog from an AKC registered breeder” or impossible to answer “how much does a cat cost?”. The objective parts of these discussions belong in their own “what is” articles.

Indeed, why single out pets for how-to pieces? Not unless you’re also planning:

 How to neuter a dog  Open heart surgery for beginners  How to make an omelette  Building a rocket in one hundred easy lessons  How to dance a foxtrot  etc. etc.

By the way, if anyone is planning a whole “how-to” series, (including Dr Sanger’s fiddle instruction), then it seems to me we have plenty of information for a sister project, no? Aleta Curry 19:31, 3 May 2007 (CDT)

I just found this after reading some responses on Slashdot and feel like I need to chime in and agree with Aleta(scary thought, I know). Maybe "how-to" articles are something we can consider for a subpage or something else, however, they hardly seem appropriate as a mainspace encyclopedia article. --Todd Coles 14:04, 1 November 2007 (CDT)

Well, in those places with no vets or vets but with people with no money, there is a surprisingly good technique for neutering puppies.

But on point, this article simply does not belong here but on a subpage.

Stephen Ewen 22:58, 1 November 2007 (CDT)

Lede image

The lede image needs a replacement ASAP because it will soon be deleted as it is by an unidentifiable author. Stephen Ewen 22:27, 30 January 2008 (CST)