Talk:Dog intelligence

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Dog & Intelligence in the same sentence[edit]

Sure this is a contradiction.— Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.129.25.28 (talk) 23:11, 10 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop this trolling already.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Ramdrake (talkcontribs) 23:22, 10 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Signed for archiving purposes only.  William Harris |talk  10:11, 6 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Uncited statement.[edit]

"researchers have as much difficulty agreeing on a method for testing canine intelligence as they do for human intelligence."

Not only is there no citation for this statement, but it's also rather nonsensical, as mainstream science couches the evaluation of human intelligence firmly in IQ. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 198.72.236.71 (talk) 19:31, 20 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Redevelopment[edit]

Taking into consideration many of the comments post here over the last 6 years, that the page had some good citations and some poor ones, that it had much uncited conjecture, and the fact that it had little structure at all, I have taken the liberty of completely redeveloping this article. I trust that it is of more use to readers now. Regards, William Harristalk • 05:00, 24 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Structure[edit]

This article on "Dog intelligence" now has a section on "Intelligence". This seems a little odd to me.DrChrissy (talk) 11:59, 9 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Because the opening sentence needs to be reflected in the body somewhere with citation, something that now appears to have been lost due to some recent "guild editing". Regards,  William Harris |talk  10:20, 6 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Citations[edit]

There are no citations for Chaser and Rico at the beginning of the article.

This sentence: "A study in 2013 indicated that dogs appear to recognize other dogs regardless of breed, size, or shape, and distinguish them from other animals", seemed out of place under Awareness; it may make more sense under the heading Perception, because it mentions that perception "includes such processes as . . . the identification of events and objects".

There is also no citation for the claim that dogs can sense magnetic fields, under the heading of Perception.

Woltersemily (talk) 17:20, 14 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

There is no requirement to provide citations in the lead if they are given in the main text - but they can be added. On the other matters, please be bold and make the edits or tag where you think a citation is needed. DrChrissy (talk) 19:00, 14 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
There is no need to provide a reference unless the statement might be disputed. Go to Google Scholar and enter the words "dog magnetic field" - it is not as if the topic is arguable. William Harris • (talk) • 09:42, 2 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

There's an image on this page that's supposedly of an English springer spaniel, but the filename says border collie. The image is linked both from https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Border_Collie and https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/English_Springer_Spaniel