Talk:Bardigiano

Equine Low‑importance

	Horses portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Equine, a collaborative effort to improve Wikipedia's coverage of articles relating to horses, asses, zebras, hybrids, equine health, equine sports, etc. Please visit the project page for details or ask questions at the barn.EquineWikipedia:WikiProject EquineTemplate:WikiProject Equineequine articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by Horse breeds task force.

Standard?[edit]

Where is the standard for the Bardigiano published? The Breed Register is kept by the AIA, but I can't find the standard on their site. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 13:37, 13 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

May not be one. If not, just leave the spot blank in the infobox. Montanabw^(talk) 04:43, 14 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

There is one; it was hidden at the end of something else. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 20:58, 22 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Supersize me[edit]

Oops, inadvertently supersized the Bardigiano in the justification for the move (had 2 breed standards open, checked the wrong one). All other reasons for the move stand. Some Bardigiano males, but no females, are horse-sized by Anglophone definition. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 20:56, 22 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This is a classic example of why the arbitrary 14.2 cutoff is kind of silly, other than in certain competition categories. I agree that if the breed association considers it a horse, then it's a horse. Generally people are going to be more upset if you call a horse a pony than the other way around. Montanabw^(talk) 23:14, 22 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

And--No objections here if you want to do a major fumigation of the article, it's short, not comprehensive, and there is much expansion possible. Only caveat is if existing sources can be located, try to not completely toss verified material unless you have a better source that contradicts it (which is common enough). And try and find SOME English sources (online OK) that support the Italian ones, or at least be sure that any links go to the proper web page so someone could at least run the source through Google language and verify that it says something close to what is stated. Montanabw^(talk) 23:14, 22 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Possible copyright problem[edit]

This article has been revised as part of a large-scale clean-up project of multiple article copyright infringement. (See the investigation subpage) Earlier text must not be restored, unless it can be verified to be free of infringement. For legal reasons, Wikipedia cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material; such additions must be deleted. Contributors may use sources as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences or phrases. Accordingly, the material may be rewritten, but only if it does not infringe on the copyright of the original or plagiarize from that source. Please see our guideline on non-free text for how to properly implement limited quotations of copyrighted text. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 23:12, 14 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

References[edit]

I'm thinking of doing some work on this page, including improving the sourcing. If I were to do so I would change the reference format to the list-defined system – references defined in the reference section, not in the text – and to hand-written refs (without cite templates). I might do that in a day or two if no-one minds, but will of course leave well alone if there's any objection. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 20:08, 1 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]