Talk:Arabian horse/Archive 1

Behavior

The Arabian Horse is an amazing, beautiful creature.... I've "owned" several breeds and cross-breeds of horses, but it is the Arabian that "owns me". Not only are they incredibly beautiful to observe, both standing and moving, they are wonderfully affectionate, quite intelligent, athletic, and versatile. I have found my relationships with my Arabians to be more like that of "Man and Dog" as there is a natural Human - Arabian Horse connection. I have not found this type of relationship with other breeds of horses. I have also found that other breed owners are quick to criticize or sterotype the Arabian as flighty... or hot. My experience has proven otherwise. Upon asking, you will typically find that most of those who criticize the Arabian have never owned one. It also seems that most Arabian horse owners have owned other breeds and have "migrated" to Arabian horse ownership for the very reasons stated above. Visit an Arabian Farm, meet the owners, talk to them about their treasured horses and their relationships and you will open up a world of love, friendship, appreciation and lifetime enjoyment. Anonymous user

They're kind of pricey though. Get me a good deal on one (I'll figure out where to put it later). Alexander 007 1 July 2005 08:36 (UTC)

I have an Arbian too. My previous horse was part Morgan and much different in temperament. The Morgan cross was practically impossible to startle. My Arabian reacts with sudden course alterations over rabbits that suddenly appear and things that I can't see or hear. But after she goes left and I continue going straight she stops to check out why I'm lying on the ground. She also reacts emotionally when I twist my ankle and cry out in pain, and when I suffered a siezure and lay struggling for breath for an hour or two the lady who found me said the horse was on the other side of the fence pacing back and forth and neighing. I was in the hospital for several days and when I came back she suffered separation anxiety every time I got in the car to go get groceries. I've had experiences with lots of other horses, but the degree of emotional involvement with things such as I have mentioned above is far different from the reactions of any others. Of course all horses are slightly different in temperament. I doubt that every Morgan or Morgan cross is as unflappable as my first horse. On the other hand, if I had to buy a horse for police use in crowd control then I think I would try out some Morgans. P0M 1 July 2005 19:00 (UTC)

Too positive

This article is far too positively weighted in favor of the positive traits of the Arabian. I'm not well versed in horse-lore, so I'm probably not the one to rewrite this article, but it definitely needs some work. Remember: don't try to sell the breed, just give the facts. Harkenbane 08:35, 29 November 2005 (UTC)

"far too positively weighted in favor of the positive traits"— If you think this is still true, can you give some example of what caused you to make this comment? I've lived with multiple Arabians (including a stallion) in my back yard for over 25 years and I'm willing to edit. —RandallJones 02:17, 16 February 2006 (UTC)

I wonder what this reader regards as the negative characteristics of the breed? With other animals, dogs for instance, certain breeds may have acquired problems such as the tendency to hip dysplasia. Is that the kind of thing s/he wants to know about? I don't know of any particular problems. P0M 05:05, 16 February 2006 (UTC)

Agreed. The usual hack is "high strung" or "flighty". There's some on that already, but I'll reread it closely. A previous generation was bred too light behind and they got a rep for being great halter horses but poor performers, but that was a fad that's pretty much gone now. They don't come in palomino, darn it, but that's there. I could add something "negative" about folks that would breed anything with four legs during the Million Dollar Days. —RandallJones 06:21, 16 February 2006 (UTC)

I was just grooming mine and I remembered one quirk. I read somewhere that some Arabians are so sensitive to light brushing down near their hooves on their front legs that they may pass out. I'll check my vetinary medicine book and maybe it will have some confirmation of that point. "Flighty" sounds like a very subjective value judgment, i.e., it really means "too sensitive and quick to react to the environment to suit my tastes." I wouldn't choose an Arabian for a police horse to use in crowd control, I'd choose a Morgan. On the other hand, if I had to be on the lookout for somebody stalking me in the wilderness then the sensitivity to changes in the environment of the Arabian would be just what I would want. P0M 00:22, 17 February 2006 (UTC)

Arabians will not pass out if they are brushed lightly on their legs (nor if they're brushed hard on their legs). They're horses, after all. I *really* do think the "million dollar days" whould be mentioned. It is an important, if rather sad, part of the history of the Arabian and the American breeding industry. I thought I had added something on it months ago, but maybe I didnt (or it was erased). The breeding for extreme characteristics was detrimental. I think those "extreme arabs" was part of what gave the breed their "flighty" and sometimes "unathletic" stereotypes that are still seen today. But now that breeders are breeding for soundness, athleticism, and temperament, people are starting to see what talents the breed has to offer. Eventer 28 February 2006

The current text looks pretty good. If you want to improve it further, my suggestion would be to make comparisons rather than blanket statements. Calling Arabians "athletic," or "beautiful," "intelligent" or anything else doesn't tell readers anything, because all horses are generally viewed as athletic, beautiful, etc. Remember - if Arabians are strong/agile/beautiful/hardy/intelligent then why do people still raise other breeds? Harkenbane 02:28, 6 May 2006 (UTC)

So Harkenbane, given that you may be right about neutrality of tone, and I'll think about it a bit, nonetheless have you got any actual constructive wording suggestions? I'm all ears...or do you just not like Arabians? Subjectively they ARE more artistically beautiful than other horses (look at the horse in art should you doubt), and in terms of more objective criteria like IQ are more intelligent than the average horse (which is a plus and a minus, by the way), plus it is unquestioned that they have superior endurance. People breed other kinds of horses for other reasons. In fact, some people hate Arabians precisely BECAUSE they consider them too intelligent, too quick and too sensitive, and some people think pretty is as pretty does and are as suspicious of good-looking horses are they are of good-looking women! <grin> It's not like I said they were the fastest over short distances (they aren't) nor the most powerful (they aren't), nor the calmest deadheads (they aren't). Not to be snarky, but I've already put a gazillion hours into this article just to clean it up and still have really tried to keep the best of what others have already contributed. So, suggestions are always preferred when you can provide alternatives, and best, cite a source, to boot! Montanabw 20:33, 9 May 2006 (UTC)

I can't give you anything very specific, because I'm not a horse person; I read a few of the entries on Wikipedia because my wife is passionate about horses, specifically Arabians, and I like to take an interest in her life. But you mentioned IQ, so let me ask you - do you have data on equine IQ? How about Arabian encephalization quotient averages? If so, I'd love to see it. Or do you have data on Arabian horsepower? If so, put it in. Lacking such hard data, it's also good to make specific comparisons between breeds, and while there are some of these comparisons in the current article, I think it could use more. If you'd like an example of what I'm talking about, you could try looking up the properties of Bronze; that article frequently compares bronze with other metals and alloys. Because of these comparisons, readers have a good idea about why bronze was created, or whether or not they wanted to use bronze in their work. Harkenbane 18:33, 11 May 2006 (UTC)

OK Harkenbane, that's fair. I will look at what's in there about intelligence and see what can be tweaked--one way or the other--But compared to the properties of bronze, well, Equine IQ is actually a pretty controversial field generally, and much evidence is, admittedly, anecdotal...studies comparing horses of any breed to other animals are also hotly debated and I don't even know if there's a scientific consensus on what "animal IQ" really is... when is an animal exhibiting good memory and fast learning (i.e. horse smarts), and what is raw abstract reasoning skill (i.e. dolphins)? I will look to see what, if any, studies have been done between horse breeds, though I suspect that even if they exist, the study will have been limited to too few animals to have any real indica of scientific reliability. (For that matter, does anyone know if there have been similar studies between dog breeds???) As for other traits, the endurance claim is the most tested. Just check the results of rides like the Tevis Cup and other 100 mile races, both in the US and internationally. Other than the occasional mule, mustang or appaloosa, an overwhelming majority of winners are purebred of half-Arabians. As for beauty, let me know if you can measure it, eye of the beholder and all. I think there are scientific studies that people are drawn to animals that exhibit traits of neotany...big, wide eyes, refined stature, etc...so by that criteria, Arabians would win hands down! <Grin> Not that I'm opposed to cutting that which is superflous; doggone article is already at 36K and I'm getting nagged by the Wiki preview feature that it's too long. (If only there weren't so many pretty pictures..I've already left out that great pic of Napoleon on his Arabian...)Montanabw 18:27, 15 May 2006 (UTC)

Well, even in spite of a lack of actual psychometric evidence, the question of how smart an animal is can be reasonably estimated simply on the basis of the encephalization quotient, which is a measure of brain size relative to body mass. This works within the human species, with correlations showing at 40% between brain size and IQ, and there's no reason to think it wouldn't work with animals as well. Here's a link discussing encephalization quotient: http://serendip.brynmawr.edu/bb/kinser/Int3.html . If you can find some way of measuring average brain size relative to average body mass, you can use the equation given there to get a good idea of average intelligence for any given horse breed. Interestingly, this page http://www.fathom.com/course/21701781/session3.html states that there is a strong trend for domesticated animals to have smaller brains than their wild cousins; I understand that Arabian horses are closest to wild horses, and this may actually mean that their brains are larger relative to their body size than compared to more heavily domesticated breeds. Harkenbane 01:14, 16 May 2006 (UTC)

The ongoing joke from non-horse people is that the horse (any breed) has a brain the size of a baked potato! I'm talking off of memory here, but I believe that the ratio of cerebrum to cerebellum in a horse is real roughly the inverse of what it is in people...in other words, the horse is a "genius" at balance and coordination, also there is some scientific study to verify that they have incredible memories. However, the frontal lobe of the cerebrum in a horse is certainly nothing compared to that of a human. There isn't a lot of abstract reasoning there, nor, luckily for us, much worrying about the future! My point is simply that raw brain size also has to consider ratio of the various structures within the brain... What I CAN say about Arabians is that the bulge on the forehead called the "jibbah" is NOT due to a larger brain (though some like to claim it is) but rather is due to increased sinus capacity, an adaptation to the desert. That said, given that the Arabian is a bit smaller and lighter than the average horse, the ratio of brain size to body mass would be interesting to look at. (I should see if Cal Poly Pomona has done anything on this...they have the old Kellogg Ranch now...) As for domestication, given that the Arabian prototype may have actually been one of the earliest horses domesticated, but then raised in a very harsh, survival-of-the-fittest world where the animal still needed a lot of its wild instincts, I can't say what impact on brain size that domestication had...and in the case of the horse, both people-friendly traits were bred for, but also wild traits were retained. The most fascinating thing to me is that horses in general are one of the only prey species--and the only LARGE prey species--that humans domesticated primarily for companion purposes rather than for food or clothing...I mean, some people DO eat horses :'-(, but most of the time, only after they have had a long period of service to humans in other forms. I suppose some breeds of cattle who were used as draft animals would also count, but Idon't know a lot about draft oxen...(Rabbits come to mind as another prey animal sometimes domesticated as a pet, but the reality is that there aren't that many pet rabbits, and fewer still who, say, go to obedience school...and who does anything with a hamster or gerbil other than watch them run in the little wheel??) Again, what are the implications of that on brain development and intelligence?

Another thought I had after looking at your links is that horses are one of the animals who have become LARGER after domestication. The Przewalski's horse, for example, is only the size of a large pony. What might be the impact of that? Hmmm. More questions than answers here, that's for sure...all I can say anecdotally is that there's WAY more going on in there than can be scientifically verified. Montanabw 18:40, 16 May 2006 (UTC)

No Longer Too Positive

OK, I found my old version that someone deleted (probably because it was one of the darker times for the breed), and replaced the text. Really people, I'm not bashing arabs with the 1980s history, so please leave it in there! I also added in stuff about their lack of bascule, which is detrimental to their jumping. I love arabians, but they are a bit notorious for their sometimes poor jumping form (tight with the front legs, but too hollow). Please people, dont take out the bad stuff because you love your arabian! My old horse was an arab, and while she was an OK jumper, I'll be the first to admit that she definetly lacked bascule. Im trying to be unbiased.Eventer 28 February 2006

The mention of jumping characteristics is valid. But could you please explain what "splinter belly" means in the article, or, preferably, find another way to say it that the average well-informed reader can understand? P0M 05:39, 1 March 2006 (UTC)

There should be some discussion of SCID in Arabian horses. I am not a vet or breeder - anyone else? mizchalmers 8 Mar 2006

Somebody see if they mention HERDA or HYPP in the Quarter Horse page first, eh?  ;-D Montanabw 23:23, 9 May 2006 (UTC)

Editing

Hi all, I'm new to Wikipedia, but I would like to be welcomed to this article as yet another editor. I have owned Arabians for over 30 years, and I also do a lot of writing. So, between the two, I promise to take my best, neutral stab at trying to keep the best of what's there so far, consolidating redundant material, and generally trying to wordsmith this piece into something helpful.

Several of the anonymous recent changes made on 3/30 were mine before I figured out how to create a login.

What's in there still isn't a work of copperplate prose, but hopefully each tweak helps.

Cleanup and Polished--maybe

Have made a sincere attempt to clean up, polish and consolidate the best points of the existing article. There are many controversies surrounding Arabian horses and I attempted to put the most universally accepted, neutral viewpoint materials in one spot, while providing what I hope is a balanced discussion of the controversies within the breed.

I am thinking about how do deal with the genetic lethals issues...many breeds have them, will see if the Quarter Horse or Paint Horse articles discuss theirs at all...

There's a need to do more work on this article, but I'll keep an eye out for what gets added and try to wordsmith everything into something that won't get us slapped back on the cleanup list. Montanabw 00:04, 8 April 2006 (UTC)B

Alas the Arabian!!!

I've owned and bred Arabians for 17 years and in that 17 years of my life I've realized that I carry secrets of the breed in my heart. I don't really ponder much on them but when people ask me questions about the breed it's almost as though I'm speaking about a spirit that really exists instead of a horse or animal. I've even encountered telepathy with one old mare before she died. I kept getting this message in my head when I looked into her eyes every day for about 2 weeks that she was going to die. Two weeks later my husband left me and took the old mare from me. I begged him not to take her and told him she will die. He came back 2 days later to tell me about her dropping dead in front of him and he cried so hard about what had happened. It was a strange feeling to pick up on the message she was sending me through her eyes. I do believe that God has put these animals on this planet to enhance our souls, to change us and make us better people. 6/8/06 - Rose

The Arabians are more than just horses, they are the ONLY purebred horse in the world. Without the Arabian blood there would be no other breeds and all other breeds would fall off over time. Here's what I believe: He took his mighty hand and formed an image out of the sand; and with a forceful wind he made the breath from within; In a cloud of thunder came the sound of hooves on the ground; and with the firey sun he joined the soul and spirit in one. Alas the Arabian. - Poem I wrote one evening. I think that sums it all up. Anything anyone wants to know about arabians I can probably answer. But the biggest question of all...WHY. Why are they the way they are? Because they are smarter than any other breed. That's why. And most of them are smarter than most humans so humans tend to shrug it off and call them flighty because they don't have the slightest clue on how to communicate with the Arabian. Ha....I'd rather be left alone on this planet with an Arabian than with another human being because just by being a care taker of the breed has taught me more about life than any human I've ever encountered. 6/8/06 - Rose

LISTEN TO YOUR ARABIAN The most important thing you can learn from Arabians is to listen; read them; try to understand them so that you can communicate with them. Listen to what they feel because if there is danger ahead you can prevent a terrible accident by listening to your horse. Most people want their horse to do what THEY want it to do when riding on the trail, but you better listen to your horse. Communication with your horse is the key to survival. They have instincts that we do not have. They can smell danger ahead. We cannot. Trail riding is a dangerous sport and each ride presents new obstacles. If you're horse tells you it doesn't want to go through a swamp...there IS a REASON why not. Don't take your horse into danger and expect it to do what you want it to do. Most breeds will submit to what the rider wants, but an Arabian will not if there is danger ahead. This is where people assume the horse is flighty or stubborn and resists to what you are asking it to do. Remember, they know things you do not know and have a natural instict to go around a situation that presents danger. 6/13/06 - Rose

Talk about recent edits

Thanks all who have made positive contributions to this article and especially those who did some really great formatting and cleanup work and fixed MY mistakes! I do have a couple of comments, though.

1. This really isn't the place to promote your own animals, either testimonials like "my horse Susie is great" or pseudo-advertising like "here is a photo of my stallion, Ibn Terrific". So, please only submit photographs of living animals to illustrate a point made in the article, and preferably without naming the actual horse (at least within the article). And, actually, the page is already getting pretty image-heavy (mostly my fault, I admit, I love that old artwork!). All we really still need is one very well-done body/conformation shot that clearly shows all relevant traits, preferably of an animal whose Arabian type and conformation isn't going to be controversial, and it is best that we DON'T use an image of a currently living horse.

2. Let's be VERY careful about naming specific horses, or even specific bloodline groups, and try to do so only when there's a really relevant purpose. And if you must add a named horse, then at least please spell their name correctly and please be sure you make an accurate, verifiable and citable statement about the horse that has some relevance other than to just plug a certain set of bloodlines and say they are in lots of pedigrees (FYI, Zobeyni probably IS in about 90% of all Arabian pedigrees if you go back far enough. That's why he gets to headline the article, OK?)

3. Please don't break the Wiki links when you are editing. If you edit a link, please physically check the link to be sure it still goes to the correct page...I don't know why a capitalization change breaks some links and not others, but it's a pain to keep fixing these.

4. This is just my opinion, but to keep the neutrality of tone we need, let's remember that there is a consensus that most Arabian Horse mythology and legend IS in fact closely linked to Islamic and especially Bedouin culture, and so let's just give Allah credit where its due, OK? <grin>

Finally, if you have expertise on any other horse breeds, I noticed that a lot of those other breed pages are kind of a mess and need some help too! The Quarter Horse page is practically a disaster, about where the Arabian page was a couple months ago. So if anyone knows how to insert a cleanup tag over there... Montanabw 22:06, 26 May 2006 (UTC)

Suggestions

Stuff like the following needs to be more neutral:

The Arabian horse is known as one of the most beautiful breeds of horses, with outstanding stamina and intelligence. The Arabian is one of the most popular horse breeds in the world...

Instead of saying the horse is beautiful, describe specifically what it looks like. For example, instead of saying it is popular, cite statistics on population.

Montanabw 21:20, 20 April 2006 (UTC) 21:20 yeah, I agree. Made a few tweaks to see if it can be improved upon for the moment. Not where it should be yet, but glad you pointed it out. Intros are important, yet when you are spending all your time on substantive material within the article...The whole article was so bad it was on the cleanup list, it's been tough to try and keep the spirit of what others have added and yet get it cleaned up and useful.

Problem is that Arabians are pretty controversial horses. Truly an art to get a neutral view. When you know 'em well enough to write with at least some accuracy, you just love 'em so much that you have to fight to stay neutral in tone.

Maybe that's why I just wimped out and added a bunch of history instead! Ha!

Or maybe your just Anti-Arab? ;) Iam sure Cynical reasons run deep in Western blood when it comes to eastern history and culuture.

Not with Arabian horses, I don't think. Most people who love them, like me, also develop considerable respect for Bedouin culture and at least a passing understanding of Islam, because it was so inextricably intertwined with the development of the breed of horse. The controversy with Arabian horses is essentially one between those of us who find them friendly, value their hardiness and enjoy their intelligence versus those who think they are weak or unmanagable animals. I don't know if people who dislike Arabian horses have a generalized anti-Arab thing going on or not. I don't believe the two are related. No one who has critized my horses has ever done so from that angle--they just say ignorant and inaccurate things about Arabian horses.Montanabw 03:56, 17 July 2006 (UTC)

Updates since June 1, 2006

Hi Folks, let's try to minimize the "here's me and my pony" photos. And if you absolutely MUST upload photos, keep them at least as small as the ones already there. I think it would be best that we not use images of currently living horses. (there are two there now, and they are OK but not ideal) I would like someone with ownerfhip of a photo to upload ONE very nice conformation shot of a classic, correctly-conformed "generic" Arabian, preferably of a no-longer-living animal, but still in color and taken in the animal's prime of life. And maybe one shot of Arabians in costume at the Tournament of Roses parade.Montanabw 16:22, 5 June 2006 (UTC)

Bareback riding a non-Arabian?

I have reverted the deletion of the picture of a young lady riding bareback for two reasons.

(1) Deleting on the grounds that "bareback riding is dangerous" depends on the editor's own point of view. Riding without a helmet really is dangerous. Within a few miles of where that photograph was taken I saw the only really dangerous riding accident. I should say potentially dangerous because everybody kept their heads and Col. Sysin, the riding instructor, calmed the horse before the rider was dragged anywhere. We were jumping in the outdoor jumping area. The best student rider (who obviously was well trained before he ever got on campus) was riding a very nice horse. The horse shied from something and threw his rider to the left, but with his right boot caught in his stirrup. So he was hanging from the stirrup strap that had gone horizontally over the saddle and could not release. So saddles with stirrups that don't have a "break-out" function can be dangerous too. People get seriously injured when they ride without helmets and get their head whacked at high speeds. People get seriously injured when they participate in activities like jumping and racing. Riding bareback in a responsible way is good training for riding on balance. Deleting pictures on the grounds that something might be dangerous would eliminate most of the pictures for this article because handlers and riders are not wearing helmets.

(2) Deleting on the grounds that the horse doesn't look like an Arabian is to imply that the person who posted the picture didn't know what he was talking about. Editors do not perform the functions of researchers -- or of conformation judges. Somebody might have some doubts about the breed of the horse in the picture, if for no other reason than that the photo is not clearly focused, but the objective observer would just say that determination on the basis of that one photo is inadquate. If we sent the picture to a qualified conformation judge somewhere s/he would probably say, "I can't tell for sure. Show me better photos, and photos from other angles."

The picture wasn't hurting anybody and was showing one more way that horses interact with human beings. P0M 17:39, 5 June 2006 (UTC)

That really is a cranky little Arab mare, one I once knew well, and I have photos of her from other angles that show the dished face. She was from one of the endurance lines, rather than being a show Arab. It's not a posed picture; the rider was on a trail ride, two miles from the barn. I put that in to show that riding is not about equipment; it's about having a solid working relationship with the horse. Which is what temperament is all about. --John Nagle 18:27, 5 June 2006 (UTC)

I'm sure you love your horse, I have dozens of digital photos of my Arabs, and I haven't uploaded a single one. This isn't the place to feed your ego or promote your thing. Sadly, I'm not implying that the person doesn't know what they are talking about, but sometimes we can't objectively evaluate our own animals accurately. The photo looks like a roaned-out Appaloosa, I don't mean that as an insult, it's just an observation. I've never seen a purebred Arab that color. There's an argument made that Arabs don't even carry the roan gene, that all Arabians registered as "roan" were either rose grays or Sabinos with a roaning pattern. So based on color, head, and bone structure (especially the legs), I think it's a half. Can you positively verify this as a purebred Arabian with registration number and name so we can check the registry's Database??? It also was the biggest photo on the page, even narrowed, it's poor quality, and it is not typical of even "old style" Arabian type. I don't care much for the other two body shots in there, either, but they are better than nothing, the dressage head shot at the bottom is a nice one. And riding barefoot is as much a risk to one's feet as no helmet is to one's head. You don't want toes, fine. I don't want to get into an editing war here, but this photo doesn't belong. Maybe we need a different page titled "uses of Arabian horses" and we can upload all our fun shots there?? Montanabw 18:53, 5 June 2006 (UTC)

Oh, and if you noted my comment, it was that riding BAREFOOT is dangerous, not bareback, which, I agree, can be good for teaching balance. (However, it can also be good for teaching people--incorrectly--to hang on by the reins!) I really don't mean to be as snarky as this sounds, but frankly, the need here is for classic photos demonstrating clear breed type. I mean, I could post a call on ABlackHorse and have 20 pictures of kids with horses stuck up here tomorrow and it would not be an encyclopedia article any more, it would be a scrapbook. (Actually, though, could we post casual photos HERE? Maybe that's the thing to do. Does this horse look like and Arabian, and whether it does or not, is it suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia as an illustration? Montanabw 19:42, 5 June 2006 (UTC)

I'm sorry I ever put that picture in. It was a mistake. --John Nagle 19:45, 5 June 2006 (UTC)

And I'm sorry if I got too snarky! Montanabw 19:56, 5 June 2006 (UTC)

Arabians Bullfighting

Ok, who in the world removed my input on Arabian horses bullfighting? How can any of you exclude this sport? It's not barbaric.... it's classic and artful.....and there's also "bloodless bullfighting" where they do not kill the bulls at nor do they bleed them.

Isn't this page suppose to inform people about Arabian horses and how versatile they are? It only talks of the "common" tasks and typical training that almost every horse can do (dressage, jumping, racing, etc).

If you are going to be informative, then don't leave out other important facts.

I'm adding it back in and if anyone has a problem with this, take it up with me.

Thanks, --Webmistress Diva 04:45, 20 June 2006 (UTC)

Humm, I think what you did was duplicating already available information, so that should be removed because. BTW, it might have some more awareness in europe, but not to the degree that you claim. -- Kim van der Linde ^{at venus} 06:03, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

It wasn't removed; I EDITED your material and moved it into other sections a while back, and it is STILL THERE--see "other activities." This article was badly organized and now it is a little more understandable. Bullfighting is not a mainstream activity like showing or racing, it is a more obscure activity and that's why it's in the "other" section.

I clarified the language on bullfighting to indicate that it exists in the US and in Europe, and will add a note that Arabs crossbreed on Iberian horses into the Influence of the Arabian Horse section. But can we keep it that way, now, please?

I alo noticed that you have put stuff in about bullfighting all over many different horse pages. I linked the reference to bloodless bullfighting to your wikipedia article. While it is fine to like your sport, your contributions are not integrated into most articles, they are more like advertisements and sometimes hijack articles almost to the verge of vandalism. It is also inappropriate to falsify yourself as "Webmistress Diva" Montanabw 19:00, 20 June 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for fixing it. And NO, I am not advertising nor am I hijacking any articles.... how silly is that. I am increasing the awareness of the sport as it should be. I wouldn't say that it is not a mainstream activity, not everyone is aware that it exists. Just like racing or showing, I'm sure at one point it was not well known until someone introduced it to the world. And that is basically what I'm doing. And it's only "obscure" to those who are not in the "know" and here in the US. But in Europe, everyone knows about bullfighting on horseback.

So, please don't accuse me of vandalism and falsifying myself. I strive to make corrections within the "wiki" world and make "known" to those that are "not known" to others. It's not a crime, it's called "educating".

I'm allowed to not use my real name here. It's the same thing if someone was to use their initials. If someone really wanted to know my name, I'm sure they'll ask, until then, it's nobody's business and I'm not doing anything wrong. So mind yourself and just stick to the subject on "wiki" stuff and go police someone else who is actually violating and vandalising the wiki world.

Thanks for your concerns, but please watch what you say as it is very insulting to my intelligence. --Webmistress Diva 06:25, 21 June 2006 (UTC)

a correction needs to be made for the bullfighting section. You left out as to why Arabs are used for bullfighting. That is so essential to the section. Also, I don't think it belongs in the "other activities" section. Horses being used in parades and movies are considered "other activities". Bullfighting is an artistic sport, which deserves to be directly under the "uses of ..." section along with the other sports (dressage, endurance, etc.)

I'll give you the opportunity to put it back, and please don't forget to be a little bit more descriptive other than what you wrote originally. You wrote it as if it has no relevance. This is why I'm here so that people are not mis-informed. If I don't see it in it's appropriate place, I'll just put it in myself. --Webmistress Diva 06:43, 21 June 2006 (UTC)

My concern is calling yourself "Webmistress Diva," when you are really Pebs96, may not technically be against the rules, but it misleading because it implies that you have some kind of authority here that you don't have--and almost constitutes a "sockpuppet," which IS against the rules. You are also rather threatening in your tone when you say things like "mind yourself," etc., and are assuming I have ill will, both of which are also not Wiki culture.

You also don't really want to start an editing war of you putting things in, me taking them out, etc. I don't want someone who DOES have administrative authority have to resolve this. So let's hash it out here, and I am glad to try and reach a middle ground.

Let's put it this way: The main "Uses of Arabian Horses" section may still need more and better formatting, but as written now it starts with the major and most popular activities that the breed is best known for. Bullfighting is less well-known, doesn't have the numbers of participants that racing or showing do, and so by the NPOV policy of Wikipedia, it means it's a less important topic and needs to be lower on the page. "Other activities" is a place where everyone can be, if not happy, then at least entitled to a few words and a wiki link to their individual thing. More people ride Arabian horses in parades than in bullfights. More Arabian horses are in circuses than in bullfights. More Iberian horses are probably used for bullfighting than are purebred Arabians. In the United States, more Arabians are used for reining and working cows than in bullfights.

So therefore, it is an obscure sport. If I'm wrong, give me statistics. If you question mine, count the entries at Scottsdale and the Nationals, count the number of Arabians in the Tournament of Roses parade alone. Look at the percentage rate of growth at the Sport Horse nationals and tell me if your sport is growing anywhere near that rate. It's great that you want to promote your sport and all that, but you have to keep it in perspective, too. And I've noticed that your bloodless bullfighting page has a disputed neutrality tag on it, that's not a good thing, you know...

As far as removing the bit about agility, etc., Arabians are used for EVERYTHING because of their athleticism and agility. To keep saying it when it's up in breed characteristics is redundant and the article is already at the 32 KB limit.

One thought: Would you like to create a whole separate article on Arabians in bullfighting and then we can link to it? Or, given that I've already wiki linked to your bloodless bullfighting article, maybe you could add a special subsection there??

Let me know, but remember that we really are writing an encyclopedia here and have to keep NPOV going but also consider length, readability, etc...Montanabw 04:58, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

Here, on the personal web site of "Webmistress", is the bay Arab who is apparently the one and only Arabian used for bloodless bullfighting. That's probably not notable enough for Wikipedia. --John Nagle 06:11, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

Let me get back to you guys on these issues later, as I am a bit busy with work. But I will say this, my integrity stays the same and I am truly honest about my intentions here. (1) Our site does not sell items. I am increasing the awareness of the "bloodless" sport, so that people are aware that they can enjoy a bullfight without the gory stuff, as well as teaching a culture. (2) The horses are an integral part of this sport, because in Spanish style, the "Matador" on foot is the main event. Portuguese style is on horseback. (3) I am not trying to be the "webmistress diva" for "wiki", I use that name because I am a web designer. All I know is that when I registrered for an account here, it asks me for a name that I want to use. And there you have it.

I know that there are lots of things I have to write, so please be patient with me while I gather all of my facts together. Thanks =) --Webmistress Diva 22:13, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

No matter what, I would most graciously suggest that before you add anything, if you haven't already reviewed the following, you might want to do so: Wikipedia:User page#What_can_I_not_have_on_my_user_page.3F and Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not and particularly Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not#Wikipedia_is_not_a_soapbox Also, though you feel passionate about your subject, please remember NPOV: Wikipedia:Neutral point of view

MOST OF ALL, please read Wikipedia:Neutral point of view#Undue_weight Much of what you have to say should be said in the Bloodless bullfighting article. However, I have added a Wiki link to it from this page, and simply beg that given the dozens upon dozens of activities Arabians "can" do, that we don't put anything too far out of proportion. Racing gets barely a sentence. Ranch work gets about two words. Sport horse gets a bit more because it is growing so rapidly and is so popular. Ditto for Endurance. OTOH, while I know that a few Arabians barrel race, there is zero mention of rodeo in the article at all. Statistically, more Arabian horses are used for simple pleasure riding than anything, but pleasure riding gets two words. The Arabian article is already so long it is almost in need of being split into another piece, we really need to think about space constraints. Montanabw 18:17, 29 June 2006 (UTC)