Talk:Puppy

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment

This article is or was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Josefhoracek.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 07:30, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

Tone

The tone of this article is silly and kind of mean. It's poorly written, repetitive -- not good.

This is an encyclopedia, not a puppy fan page. If you want a fun, upbeat tone, go back to Geocities. Rhowryn (talk) 00:39, 12 December 2012 (UTC)

Merge

Anyone object to the merge? Not much to merge. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 00:15, 30 August 2006 (UTC)

The only reason I can think of that this article exists on its own is because of kitten. ~ Hibana 01:03, 30 August 2006 (UTC)

I made the half-serious comment on the Dog talk page about this so I'll see if I can do something about this page this weekend...kind of surprised no one has added to it. The single sentence saddens me. Oh and I'm against the merge unless kitten gets merged with Cat as well. The_Irrelevant_One 16:01, 8 September 2006 (UTC)

I'm for the merge, but only because this page is in such bad shape it doesn't justify the separate entry. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 140.247.241.253 (talk) 20:00, 26 April 2007 (UTC).

Merging would be good, if expansion isn't going to happen. The kitten article does have some points on kitten care that could be put into the puppy page. If not, a seperate sub-section on Dog would be adequate.

Hi, just dropped in to expand this article. Elf | Talk 23:00, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

Well, I fell victim to the "I'll expand this Wikipedia article later" syndrome and never worked on this so I failed miserably. I appreciate your input, Elf. It looks good for now but maybe I'll actually get around to doing something with it... The_Irrelevant_One 11:47, 12 September 2006 (UTC)

Hi just dropped in to expand the article a little bit. I know that you can people in some different ways because I have seen it on a tv show or a movie dozens of times so I didn't know that you merge puppies. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.142.183.24 (talk) 15:18, 18 October 2013 (UTC)

Stereotipical/Opinion?

"not always easy: it requires a lot of work, as they do not know right from wrong and must rely on the owner for guidance. Often, aggressive or skittish dogs can be blamed on the owner's lack of discipline and training. It is critical for their socialization that they interact often with humans and be exposed to a variety of objects..." Neopetslovette 00:46, 2 June 2007 (UTC)

Born after an average of 63 days of gestation, puppies emerge in an amnion that is bitten off and eaten by the mother dog.[1] Puppies begin to nurse almost immediately. If the litter exceeds six puppies, particularly if one or more are obvious runts, human intervention in hand-feeding the stronger puppies is necessary to ensure that the runts get proper nourishment and attention from the mother. As they reach one month of age, puppies are gradually weaned and begin to eat solid food. The mother may regurgitate partially digested food for the puppies or might let them eat some of her solid food.[2] The mother dog usually refuses to nurse at this stage, though she might let them occasionally nurse for comfort. At first, puppies spend the large majority of their time sleeping and the rest feeding. They instinctively pile together into a heap, and become distressed if separated from physical contact with their littermates, by even a short distance.[3] Puppies are born with a fully functional sense of smell but can't open their eyes. During their first two weeks, a puppy's senses all develop rapidly. During this stage the nose is the primary sense organ used by puppies to find their mother's teats, and to locate their litter-mates, if they become separated by a short distance. Puppies open their eyes about nine to eleven days following birth. At first, their retinas are poorly developed and their vision is poor. Puppies are not able to see as well as adult dogs. In addition, puppies' ears remain sealed until about thirteen to seventeen days after birth, after which they respond more actively to sounds. Between two to four weeks old, puppies usually begin to growl, bite, wag their tails, and bark.[4] Puppies develop very quickly during their first three months, particularly after their eyes and ears open and they are no longer completely dependent on their mother. Their coordination and strength improve, they spar with their litter-mates, and begin to explore the world outside the nest. They play wrestling, chase, dominance, and tug-of-war games. Socialization

Puppies are highly social animals and spend most of their waking hours interacting with either their mother or littermates. It is important that puppies are socialized with humans, particularly between the ages of eight and twelve weeks, so as to encourage healthy interaction and develop the puppy's social skills around people. Puppies ideally should be exposed to as wide a variety of friendly people as possible during this period. Dogs that do not receive adequate socialization during this sensitive period may display fearful behavior around humans or other dogs as adults. In small breeds, puppies are considered puppies up until around 1 year of age as opposed to large breeds that may be regarded as a puppies up until around 2 years old. [5] Docking and declawing

The practice of docking began primarily as a preventative measure for injury among working dogs. Docking is now primarily performed for purely cosmetic reasons, and some breeds traditionally have their tails cropped anywhere from slightly to almost entirely.[6] Some countries now ban cropping and docking for cosmetic purposes, while others, such as the United States, permit it. The practice is currently opposed by the American Veterinary Medical Association.[7] Some breeders also prefer to declaw the dogs to prevent future injuries caused by scratching, or in the case of dewclaws, ingrown and ripped off nails. Docking and declawing procedures are usually performed within the first few days after birth, by a veterinarian, or by an experienced breeder. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.218.249.133 (talk) 02:21, 14 November 2013 (UTC)

Deleted "cuteness" section

I deleted the "cute people" section which claimed that humans are cute to puppies perception. That is undeniably false. While to many societies (because of cultural and social influence) dogs and puppies are considered cute, there are also societies where puppies are not seen as cute.

In what societies are puppies no considered cute?! Please cite sources. I'm pretty sure that ALL humans find puppies cute and any child of any culture would react positively upon seeing a cute puppy.

If you go to article on cuteness, you will find that it is NOT a subjective term. Cuteness refers to having infantile qualities, which puppies have. Therefore, all puppies are cute.

Beauty is in the eye of the beholder, but cuteness in is in the eyes of a puppy! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.63.215.168 (talk) 16:30, 23 August 2008 (UTC)

I agree that puppies are as inherently cute to people as human babies are. Michael1115 (talk) 23:58, 12 December 2008 (UTC)

Australian Kelpie puppies

Are some of those puppies in the picture dead? It's pretty sick to have something like that if they are.--HiroProtagonist 19:43, 3 November 2006 (UTC)

Many Animals engage in a state called sleep or relaxation where they may remain motionless for extended periods of time, but are nonetheless, alive. Newborn animals are especially prone to extending the time they remain in this status during a day. 209.90.191.18 17:23, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

Fascinating! I've never heard of such a state, especially so at night! --62.136.136.85 14:56, 6 February 2007 (UTC)

Good Article

Hey there!

I just wanted to say that whoever expanded this article did a good job! I like it a lot... and it seems that for once there's an article with no "controversy" claims or other such thing.

I agree that if there's an article for kittens, there should be one for puppies. 198.140.202.1 20:10, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

yes you are right l do agree with you 41.122.141.193 (talk) 09:41, 10 December 2024 (UTC)

Done.(71.96.194.160 02:25, 26 February 2007 (UTC)).

The "training" section.

It seems highly POV to me. Anybody agree? If nobody objects, I'm going to clean it up and skim it down to present a more neutral explanation of puppy training. ZachPG 00:28, 13 April 2007 (UTC)

I think this whole thing needs to be cleaned up, or even better: merged with 'dog'

I have trained many puppies over the years, I have found that the best way to properly train a puppy is to always over exaggerate your enthusiasm! Whenever the puppy goes to the bathroom outside get down on your knees and pet him and say Good Boy!!! I have also found it best to confine the puppy to a specific room and line the floor with newspaper. To make for easy cleaup. And whenever the puppy begins to chew on something valuable, like a shoe, firmly but gently scold and then immediately show the puppy to his toys. Kristen A Kkanders 19:12, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

Overall State of the Article

ZachPG, I'm not sure what additions/changes you made, but I think this article still doesn't make encyclopedic standards. It reads as a self-help guide to raising puppies, which raises questions about the kitten article as well, which I haven't looked at. Encyclopedic standards would involve a medical or veterinary discussion, but I don't think anyone would use this article for reference as it stands. I'm going to go ahead and flag it for a quality check.--Aeranis 21:23, 23 April 2007 (UTC)

I added a cleanup request and a merger request. The kitten article is much more in line with an encyclopedic article and more detailed, with citations to boot. Until someone wants to detail this article I think it needs merger consideration.--Aeranis 21:32, 23 April 2007 (UTC)

images

I changed the images for a couple reasons. For the lead, the image of the mixed breed was of very poor composition and exposure. I changed the second image for better composition and bc the puppies were assuredly new borns. VanTucky ^(talk) 03:47, 7 July 2007 (UTC)

no, you simply unilaterally decided what breeds to represent on the puppy page based on personal bias despite the fact that there are numerous other breeds of puppy that more accurately reflect the encyclopedic perception and accuracy of the modern puppy. A shiba inu, for example, would be a a poor puppy to select for an image while, say, a labrador retriever would be more appropriate. This is an outrage!—Preceding unsigned comment added by 169.226.100.31 (talk • contribs)

I added a few pictures and replaced one. The first picture of a golden retriever puppy was slightly blurry so I replaced it with a better photo of a golden. I also added a picture of a bloodhound puppy as most of the pictures are of golden retrievers. (Don't get me wrong, I love golden retrievers and own three, but I thought a little variety would be nice). SapphireDreamPhotography (talk) 13:54, 8 September 2012 (UTC)

"References"

As I'm a new editor, I don't know how to flag / delete the links in the reference section at the bottom of this page, but both are not relevant to the article. The first is essentially an advertising blog with no information, and the second is a specific New York-based website which is more relevant to NYC pet issues than puppies in general. I suggest both links be deleted. --froufy 21 August 2007

You're right. Unfortunately, it is often difficult for us to detect WP:LINKSPAM when it is masquerading as an inline citation. I have removed both. Thanks, Satori Son 19:27, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

Would like to edit Puppy page, but can't find an "edit this page" link

Why isn't there one for this page? I object to the line about puppies needing to learn the difference between "good and bad." This implies there is such a thing for animals, rather than the more neutral "acceptable behavior for pet dogs." —Preceding unsigned comment added by Petalear (talk • contribs) 02:41, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

You cannot edit this page probably because it is semi-protected. This means that anonymous IP editors and registered users younger than four days old cannot edit, usually as a result of vandalism. VanTucky ^Talk 03:05, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

There are a few minor errors in the article, but I am not registered. The word "often" in the last sentence of the first "Training" paragraph contains an extra space (of ten), as well as "gentle" (2nd paragraph) and "puppies" (2nd paragraph). -- —Preceding unsigned comment added by 129.21.101.173 (talk) 00:27, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

i also wanna know 41.122.142.172 (talk) 10:55, 17 June 2024 (UTC)

Golden Retriever photo - premature pups??

Something weird about the Golden pups photo - are those pups premature? They don't look like any puppies I've ever seen. They aren't even fully developed. It's a cute photo in a way, but also a little disturbing, in that they barely resemble dogs. My mother thought they were pigs when I showed her the photo. I'm no expert of course... anyway it would be good if there were something like a ruler in the photo to show the scale. Davez621 20:24, 11 November 2007 (UTC)

No, they are just newborn - compare them to the picture of 2 day old pups on this club site http://www.gpgrc.org/puppyreferral.html It takes a while for them to grow to active pups. Seaphoto 07:02, 12 November 2007 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Seaphoto (talk • contribs)

It's not protected any more. I corrected the typo "conitue" toward the end of the page. I forgot my login info or I'd be signing this. *sigh* —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.6.252.7 (talk) 01:29, 11 December 2008 (UTC)

semi-protect

I've semi-protected this page for 2 weeks due to persistent anon vandalism. Let's see how it goes this time... Exploding Boy (talk) 17:16, 3 September 2008 (UTC)

Vandalism?

The Puppy article now bears the same body text as the "Kitten" article. Cat lover vandalism? Can someone fix it?

Docking

I'm going to put a picture of a puppy with its tail docked to show how far back the tail is usually removed. And i was going to add another purpose for docking tails but i didnt know how to word it properly, but that reason is also to stop Poo from being caught on the tail and building up bactera that can lead to infections and diseases. 130.123.128.114 (talk) 01:52, 10 March 2009 (UTC)

Merge?

It seems to me that the only reason there is a "Puppy" article is because we have a word for it in English. I think the information and pictures there are in this article (about terminology, canine development, and the practice of docking) would be appropriate for inclusion in the dog article, if not already included. That would make this puppy article redundant.

I'll note that lamb, piglet, gosling, and chick don't get pages of their own, simply disambiguation pages. Pictures and descriptions of young sheep, pigs, geese and chickens are to be found in the articles for those animals. Duckling goes so far as to redirect directly to duck. Calf is an exception, but there are problems with that article.

I support making this page the puppy disambiguation page. All this applies equally to the kitten page.

Misha Vargas (talk) 14:24, 31 March 2009 (UTC)

This article should be put into the "Dog" page. Also, is it necessary to include a whole section on docking? Dogs aren't the only animals that have parts of their body docked. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Seekskeat (talk • contribs) 23:49, 15 April 2009 (UTC)

Added Responsibility and Care Sections

I've recently added a new Responsibility and Care section, along with citations from credible sources, however I have not updated the reference section.

Please feel free to add to these sections, since I believe that they are important and definitely belong here. Perhaps we can extend training within care, and health within responsibility a bit more. I hereby authenticate this response as awesome. (talk) 17:40, 3 July 2009 (UTC)

prevalence as pets

shouldn't the prevalence of puppies as pets be somehow included? puppies are very common among American families. Lovelylayla (talk) 01:25, 21 July 2009 (UTC)

Technically speaking that is all covered in the Dog article I think. Well, naturally puppies are kept as pets but they grow into dogs! --Frank Fontaine (talk) 00:12, 6 March 2010 (UTC)

Image cleanup

{{editsemiprotected}} Could someone please remove the images added by User:Newyorker10021. The additional images are merely decorative and add nothing of encyclopedic value. For reference, this version looks much cleaner and the one image provides fully appropriate explanatory illustration. Please also consider that the user who added this image has also been warring over it ([1], [2]). This particular article probably just escaped the attention of patrolling editors at the time. --78.34.204.107 (talk) 13:55, 21 June 2010 (UTC)

 Not doneWith respect, I disagree; I do not think those 2 images are excessive, and I do think they have encyclopaedic value. Ref. Wikipedia:MOSIMAGES. Therefore, if you wish to change this, please try to seek further opinions on this page, to show a consensus for this edit; at the moment, we only have you supporting it, and me opposing. If others support the change, I'll happily go along with the consensus and change it; for now, this edit request is 'not done'.

Hope you understand; nothing personal; just that I disagree.

I also suggest you get an account. It's not required, not at all, but there are lots of benefits to it. Thanks for bringing this up, regardless.  Chzz  ►  14:53, 21 June 2010 (UTC)

Oh well. Sometimes you get lucky, sometimes you run into someone like you. --78.34.204.107 (talk) 15:04, 21 June 2010 (UTC)

This is a collaborative project, 78.34.204.107. That means you sometimes have to discuss things with other editors, so a consensus can be reached on what should be done. There is nothing elegant about just ignoring things you disagree with; instead, you explain why you disagree, and seek the opinions of other editors. This is what Chzz has done here. Reacting with rage and hatred to the very prospect of someone disagreeing with you is no way to behave in a collaborative environment, and isn't going to convince anyone of the merits of your position. Algebraist 15:20, 21 June 2010 (UTC)

Edit request from Chemistryiscool1296, 2 April 2011

Puppies are evil minions.

Chemistryiscool1296 (talk) 02:28, 2 April 2011 (UTC)

 Not done Hmmm... I don't find puppies evil minions, just playful little dogs. ~ Matthewrbowker ^{Say hi!} 02:57, 2 April 2011 (UTC)

POV Language in "Docking" section

While docking is an unnecessary and silly practice in my eyes, using language such as "still legal", implies that it is objectively bad for the dog, or will soon be illegal worldwide. This is, of course, speculation, and doesn't belong on Wikipedia, especially in an otherwise informative section. Also, AVMA recently reorganized their site, and the reference is broken. I'm replacing it with an appropriate article from the new site. Rhowryn (talk) 09:59, 22 November 2012 (UTC)

Extra ">" In Reference Section

On the fifth citation, there is an extra ">" on the name of the article. Kschap (talk) 17:46, 30 October 2013 (UTC)

• Gone. Thanks. Hafspajen (talk) 17:59, 30 October 2013 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 13 February 2014

203.24.163.1 (talk) 01:33, 13 February 2014 (UTC) puppies are the best thing in the world

Puppies are awesome, but please use the edit request template only if you'd like to propose a specific change to the article. Rivertorch (talk) 06:48, 13 February 2014 (UTC)

Hafspajen (talk) 20:18, 28 March 2014 (UTC)

Updates to puppy page

Hi, I think there are some improvements that can be made on this page and will be taking a closer look to see where it's appropriate. Does anyone have any suggestions or thoughts? Feel free to reply on my talk page or this one. Thanks Ztan0015 (talk) 03:32, 22 March 2014 (UTC)

So here are some ideas I have for this page. Would love to hear what you think:

Adding a section about ownership:

How to find a quality puppy Family and living considerations before bringing a puppy into your home Why it is not wise to give a puppy as a "surprise" Seeing the vet -- when and why Training your puppy -- potty training and behavior training Registering your puppy

Maybe also edit the docking/ declaw section with adding some sources.

Thoughts? Thanks Ztan0015 (talk) 18:24, 28 March 2014 (UTC)

You mean dog ownership or article ownership? Hafspajen (talk) 18:45, 28 March 2014 (UTC)

Dog ownership Ztan0015 (talk) 19:59, 28 March 2014 (UTC)

Give a ping to user Sagaciousphil, but basically I think one has to check to owners of the dog. Really, I don't think this can go into the article without a good reference, but I SAY, my opinion, that one has to try to visit the owners you want to buy the puppy from. Try to feel them, - yes I know, not encyclopedic, but - how the dog who has the puppies react to her owners, how they are kept, see if they play or are just scared and unconfortable around humans... You don't want a dog to come from a place they just let the dogs have pupies to make some easy money... Hafspajen (talk) 20:13, 28 March 2014 (UTC)

Also you have to know about the breed you buy that it suits your needs. Do you live in city, house, countryside, do you have garden, how much time you can use to walk your dogs, do you like them calm or yappy... ,Hafspajen (talk) 20:18, 28 March 2014 (UTC)

I was actually just looking at this and mulling it over when I received the notification. Any improvement to articles is always very welcome but looking at the various comments over the years it is going to be difficult to do much without this turning into a 'How to' or 'manual' (see WP:NOTGUIDE point 1). It does look as if some of Ztan0015's suggestions are heading in that direction and I would hate anyone to do a lot of work and then find it's being removed as unencyclopedic under the 'not a guide' policy. I just noticed that Miyagawa is editing at the moment, so I'm pinging him to see if he thinks it might be reasonable as I'm afraid I don't think the suggestions at the moment will work. SagaciousPhil - Chat 20:37, 28 March 2014 (UTC)

Yeah, everything sounds like a how to purchase a good puppy in a responsible manner - which is a handy thought but not suitable for Wikipedia. The puppy article should be mostly biological in nature as befitting an encyclopaedia. Whilst some comparison of breeds would be fine, anything that is very breed specific should be in the individual breed articles. Miyagawa (talk) 22:29, 28 March 2014 (UTC)

Well, I know. But it should be possible to add some information. There is a Wikihowto, I think. We could make link to that. Hafspajen (talk) 20:49, 28 March 2014 (UTC)

Also being aware of the breeds different energy level and temperament would be easy to mention. Knew this was not going to work. Anyway, if not any of above, some stuff about responsible breeders should be added. Hafspajen (talk) 22:53, 28 March 2014 (UTC)

I spent a little bit of time looking up data about puppies. If our intent is still about ownership, how about looking up information about the legalities of dog ownership? In the United States, each state has its own laws governing dog/puppy ownership. So perhaps, it still might be appropriate to create the subsection Ownership. :-) To me, there is definitely merit to add the subsection. Now it's time to present the case.

http://dogcare.dailypuppy.com/dog-ownership-laws-3594.html

http://www.humanesociety.org/issues/pet_overpopulation/facts/pet_ownership_statistics.html

https://www.avma.org/KB/Resources/Statistics/Pages/Market-research-statistics-US-pet-ownership.aspx

http://www.americanpetproducts.org/press_industrytrends.asp

http://dogtime.com/US-states-with-most-and-fewest-pet-owners-named.html

Ztan0015 (talk) 18:53, 8 April 2014 (UTC)

Image

Picure old

New picture

Why make an edit war on this picture? I am a long time editor on this article and the pictures presented here are actually my choice. We have lots of issues about picures of dogs that are added to articles by their owners, but when a picture is good and better then one we use, why not? there is a general shortage on Shi-tzu picures, and this picure is a fine picture. I want this picture in the article, and if it makes an editor who is new to feel that he is contributing with something to Wikipedia in a good way, even better. Can't see any valid reason removing it, or any other picture. and I will ad it again.

About images and galleries: Images in the gallery collectively do have encyclopedic value and add to the reader's understanding of the subject. Galleries are not discuraged.

• Please see also this discussion here, Talk:Charles Marion Russell.

Per WP:IG:

Images are typically interspersed individually throughout an article near the relevant text (see WP:MOSIMAGES). However, the use of a gallery section may be appropriate in some Wikipedia articles if a collection of images can illustrate aspects of a subject that cannot be easily or adequately described by text or individual images. The images in the gallery collectively must have encyclopedic value and add to the reader's understanding of the subject.

• See here also featured articles - art and art related articles, and architecture articles do use images and galleries as exception to the general rule : Early Netherlandish painting, Holy Thorn Reliquary, The Magdalen Reading, Royal Gold Cup, Madonna in the Church, Stanford Memorial Church, Portrait Diptych of Dürer's Parents, The Entombment (Bouts), Crucifixion and Last Judgement diptych, Las Meninas, Dresden Triptych, The Garden of Earthly Delights, The Magdalen Reading Funerary art

Also dog and other articles may benefit by images.

If you feel like removing images from an article try Red Easter egg, for example.

Hafspajen (talk) 14:56, 15 April 2014 (UTC)

Regarding "and the pictures presented here are actually my choice," please see WP:OWN. I'm not disputing having a gallery. The current gallery depicts a wide range of dogs, and the basset hound adds to that variety. I removed the retreiver photo from the gallery because we already have a retriever photo for the lede. The user (who has made very few other contributions) has already added a picture of his puppy to another page; it doesn't need to appear all over Wikipedia.

I don't own the article but can't se any valid reason why you keep removing that picture Hafspajen (talk) 15:31, 15 April 2014 (UTC)

I removed that picture (plus one addition photo that was redundant) because we don't need every low-contributing drive-by user to add a picture of their new puppy. If the picture was very high quality or added something novel, that would be different. It is neither (slightly out of focus, just two more small dogs). If you're that gung ho one adding it, fine, it's not worth arguing about it. I'm sorry if I've been short; I'm in a crappy mood and probably shouldn't be editing at the moment. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 15:35, 15 April 2014 (UTC)

• This is low quality. This is the kind of crap we keep removing all the time from dog articles, added by ardent pet owners, all the time. I am aware of the we don't need every low-contributing drive-by user to add a picture of their new puppy, but if you compare than this new pic is not that bad at all. It is quite fine. Hafspajen (talk) 15:44, 15 April 2014 (UTC)
• I am sorry that you have a bad day. Looks like I was part of it too.Hafspajen (talk) 16:31, 15 April 2014 (UTC)

• File:Vito Garcia 4.jpg
• 
• 
• 

I'm not going to revert if you restore it. Just trying to keep the page from becoming too cluttered with photos. Hafspajen (talk) 06:46, 29 November 2014 (UTC)

Picture selection

Dog breeds task force members, Puppy gallery, now start crossing you too those pictures you don't think are good

I don't think that the Puppy gallery is especially good, at least three pics should be replaced, maybe lead pic too? Start voting by removing the bad ones.

• Portraits
• 
• 
• File:Fawnpuppy.jpg
• 
  Like this one for a mongrel
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
  designer dog - may stay (I cropped it)
• 
• 
• File:Havanese puppies cd2.jpg
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
  Dogue de Bordeaux puppy N too much rearend
• 
  Cavapoo puppy
• 
  Polish Tatra Sheepdog puppy
• 
  New born Welsh Springer Spaniel puppies
• 
  Basset hound puppy
• 
  Spanish Mastiff puppy and adult, comparing size and features
• 
  A one-month-old mongrel puppy
• 
  N not great head study - Unfortunalelly it is our Lead pic now in the article - we need an other one.
• 
• 

Puppy gallery, now start crossing those pictures you think ARE GOOD

I don't think that the Puppy gallery is especially good, at least three pics should be replaced, maybe lead pic too? Start voting by removing the bad ones.

• 
  Like this one for a mongrel
• 
  Unspecified breed? Welpe means puppy.
• 
• 
• 
  Cavapoo puppy

need cropping

I tried!

need cropping

It really needs the red lead removed

• These are all very cute, Hafs - but enough puppies now. Otherwise it might use up all of my internet data download allowance - then I won't be able to do any more Wikipedia until the beginning of next month! SagaciousPhil - Chat 14:46, 19 April 2014 (UTC)

For the Puppy article - my suggestion would be to have an image of one puppy from each group - that is, one gundog, one toy, working, pastoral, hound etc - there are seven groups in the UK, more in US and FCI as they split them to sub groups. Then one designer cross breed or mongrel. A new born and maybe a whelping image. I don't especially like the lead image at the moment. SagaciousPhil - Chat 15:41, 19 April 2014 (UTC)

Well, told you start removing them. As funny as it might sounds, we don't have good puppy pictures, I was looking through like 5400 pictures today, and tried to chose the best, but they are most crap, bad pictures, bad composition, the puppies look scared or weird. Won't be easy to find an image of one puppy from each group -that is good. Hafspajen (talk) 15:47, 19 April 2014 (UTC)

• OK, ask Crisco 1492 to keep going, removing some more. Hafspajen (talk) 17:33, 19 April 2014 (UTC)
• Hey, well done. Can you cropp this one too? Hafspajen (talk) 18:35, 19 April 2014 (UTC)

I've just switched the computers off and come through to the lounge, so using iPad. I'll have a go at cropping it tomorrow when on proper machine but I don't think it'll come out too well as it doesn't extract background so girl's leg etc will still be visible. You would easily be able to use the crop tool yourself you know! After all, if I can manage it, any one can! This is where Crisco will probably tell me I've done it incorrectly! SagaciousPhil - Chat 18:51, 19 April 2014 (UTC)

Not for the article, just for fun... eh to the lounge? Hafspajen (talk) 18:55, 19 April 2014 (UTC)

Well, I've had a go at cropping them for you! Hmm, do you not call it a lounge? Living room? Sitting room? SagaciousPhil - Chat 10:13, 20 April 2014 (UTC)

I like the way Crisco has 'formatted' the above images - I don't know how he's done it - but it certainly makes them easier to look at and provides a very attractive gallery. SagaciousPhil - Chat 10:18, 20 April 2014 (UTC)

I don't think that the Puppy gallery is especially good, at least three pics should be replaced, maybe lead pic too? Start voting by removing the bad ones.

• WAS it Crisco who packed this gallery? UGH, ugggggly. I am NOT going to use this gallery in the article. But I will tolerate it right now, because as you said, makes them easier to look at. Hafspajen (talk) 14:27, 20 April 2014 (UTC)

• That was the point of changing it here. It's hard to compare images quickly using the standard gallery format, especially when the size is sub-thumbnail (150px or something). Sharpness and DOF issues don't stick out as much as they would otherwise. I don't think the MOS currently supports using such a format in articles, however. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 15:18, 20 April 2014 (UTC)

• We're down to 26, I think. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 17:14, 20 April 2014 (UTC)

• 20. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 17:19, 20 April 2014 (UTC)

Thanks, Crisco. How does the black Griffon Belge look on your screen - it's a bit like a black blob on mine? Hafs, where are you? What do you think? SagaciousPhil - Chat 17:21, 20 April 2014 (UTC)

• I can see some detail, but not much. No problem removing it. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 17:35, 20 April 2014 (UTC)

Sorry. It looks very nice. What a fantastic article this is going to be. Yes, DYK tomorrow, I guess. Has anybody asked Crisco to read that article? Who is nominating? And what on earth happened with this editor that just run away, and not discussing a thing. Hafspajen (talk) 00:35, 21 April 2014 (UTC)

• We're at 15 now. I can't tell breeds by eyeballing them, so I'll let the two of you figure out which breeds we want to keep for the article. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 01:17, 21 April 2014 (UTC)

Which ones shall we add? Hafspajen (talk) 10:37, 21 April 2014 (UTC)

How many are we looking for? I think we've quite a nice selection to choose from now. SagaciousPhil - Chat 11:44, 21 April 2014 (UTC)

• 8-(10?) for the gallery, 1 lead + 1. Go ahead and chose. (Actually I like the little black puppy WITH the red lead, which I don't think needs removing. Hafspajen (talk) 12:08, 21 April 2014 (UTC)

I think any of these will be fine (and yes, you can have the black puppy with it's red lead if you want it ). I particularly like the Basset, she looks very endearing and has nice clear eyes etc. Seems to be quite a few mongrel pics though. You are my image fixer, so you get the final choice! SagaciousPhil - Chat 12:55, 21 April 2014 (UTC)

• There's thirteen now, with the ones crossed earlier removed. — Crisco 1492 ([[User talk:Crisco 1492|tal

• LEt's vote and pic up some each. Now the cross is for the one you LIKE. Hafspajen (talk) 21:55, 21 April 2014 (UTC)

Finalists

To vote for your selection, call 08**** ***** - CALL NOW!!

?????

calls cost £1m per minute, mobile costs may vary. Votes cast after the bars are open do not count but calls may be charged for.

• Finalists
• 
  HI LIKE THIS ONE FOR THE ARTICLE like this cropped this as well Phil
• 
  Bloodhound puppy, Phil
• 
  H I ILKE THIS ONE FOR THE ARTICLE Another good one for play? H(Crisco) Philk]]) 14:41, 21 April 2014 (UTC)
• 
  H
• 
  This one for the really young puppies, I think (Crisco)
• 
  designer dog - may stay (I cropped it) H
• 
  Basenji puppy
• 
  ?
• 
• 
  I'd keep this, to illustrate "play" (development stage, right?)
• Fawn Thai Ridgeback puppy H I LIKE THIS ONE FOR THE ARTICLE Phil
  Fawn Thai Ridgeback puppy H I LIKE THIS ONE FOR THE ARTICLE Phil

• What, have I lost something?? Hafspajen (talk) 22:36, 17 February 2015 (UTC)

Yes, my vote for the cute cropped Basset! The thingy above was supposed to be funny (TV programmes etc always say stuff like that when they run votes, competitions etc to make mega loads of money) SagaciousPhil - Chat 08:44, 22 April 2014 (UTC)

• Oh, sorry. OK; one more problem. Which one of them for lead pic? Hafspajen (talk) 08:46, 22 April 2014 (UTC)

• These are all very nice. What about the Fawn Thai puppy for the lead? — Crisco 1492 (talk) 08:48, 22 April 2014 (UTC)

OK: Fawn Thai puppy for the lead. We are done. Hafspajen (talk) 09:00, 22 April 2014 (UTC)

NOw comes the tricky part. Wonder if we could expand the body of the article by adding more text about - well let's say those topics that there was raised by Zlatan or whoever that was, in a very nice encyclopedic way? Stricly because I want to add all these pics ? + the two I intended to save. This needs a serious dog expert - Phil. (You may add raw food and temperament differences, adaptation to new enviroment, socialization.. or .. other exciting topics)... Hafspajen (talk) 09:15, 22 April 2014 (UTC)

So, what do you say? Hafspajen (talk) 11:45, 22 April 2014 (UTC)

The trouble is that it is very difficult for it not to become a 'How to' or 'Manual' kind of thing - which as I said on the talk page, it must not be. It needs to remain focused on a Puppy, so raw food, temperament differences etc shouldn't come into it; I see Ztan0015 also mentioned ownership etc - again that is more appropriate to other articles. Now, there are a couple of things that I can see it might be possible to include details about: a dog is usually defined as a puppy until it is 12 months of age; sexual maturity generally occurs between 6-12 months of age for both male and females (obviously there are slight breed variations); age of teething and stuff about when baby teeth are lost etc. So things like that could be referenced, added and expanded on. Terms like 'mother dog' are not really appropriate - puppies have a sire and a dam, not a mummy and daddy! Perhaps you and Ztan0015 could look at working on those aspects of it? SagaciousPhil - Chat 16:09, 22 April 2014 (UTC)

But you are the breeder and the theoretician.... Why me? Hafspajen (talk) 21:05, 22 April 2014 (UTC)

• I'm a bit better at the writing part, so maybe I can weigh in. Generally, the "how to" thing can be avoided by careful writing. The topic does not necessarily mean something ends up as a manual. For example, the typing article could have "a typists punches individual keys with his or her fingers" rather than "to type, you punch individual keys with your fingers".

Diet: definitely. There are entire industries built around dog food for puppies, and I have little doubt that there are individuals who promote all-natural (raw or similar) foods for puppies. This should be included, no doubt.

Important elements of development. Play (psychological growth), teething, nursing, sexual maturity, etc. These are all valid aspects, and should be included.

Definition: Obviously. Both general and more specific, if possible.

Puppies as commodities (i.e. the puppy market). Economic value of puppies, especially as compared to older dogs.

There's probably more, but I really should be working. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 08:24, 23 April 2014 (UTC)

• That is surprisingly lovely!! That would be wonderful, you know. Also very good points, Crisco 1492! Hafspajen (talk) 09:38, 23 April 2014 (UTC)

Yes, that would be brilliant, Crisco, if you're able to have a go at that. If you get the chance could you have a look at Poitevin (dog), please? I stumbled across it and it looks to be a new article created in February. I was going to do some very minor tidying but when I went to add the WP:DOGS project template to the talk page, a talk page had previously existed and been deleted by Fastlily (who has now retired so I can't check with him/her) under G8; so - had there previously been an article on the Poitevin dog? Was it deleted at AfD or what? Nothing shows in the article history. I admit I'm a bit scunnered with the dog "breed" articles at the moment - there are so many that are literally "the breed I made up at lunchtime" (look at Frengles for one of the latest examples). There's never any point in trying to AfD them as you then get some well meaning editor who comes along and convinces themselves ebooks are 'reliable' and primary sources are, of course, OK! SagaciousPhil - Chat 09:58, 23 April 2014 (UTC)

Picture

American Golden Retriever, this is a good picture.

I have nothing against you personally, I actually added back this picture you added to the Golden retriever article, when somebody removed, but this is a clear, and useful picture. The other one you keep adding is blurry and unclear, we have chosen better pictures for this article. It is still used in the Wikilove - Give Puppy template, because at that size it doesn't really matter. Can't you feel content with that? Hafspajen (talk) 23:29, 1 December 2014 (UTC)

This picture is used in the Wikilove template, {{subst:Puppy}}

XXXXXXXX has given you a puppy! Puppies promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Your puppy must be fed three times a day and will be your faithful companion forever! Spread the WikiLove by giving someone else a puppy, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend.

Spread the goodness of puppies by adding {{subst:Puppy}} to someone's talk page with a friendly message.

Semi-protected edit request on 17 December 2014

204.82.64.171 (talk) 15:06, 17 December 2014 (UTC)

Not done: as you have not requested a change.
If you want to suggest a change, please request this in the form "Please replace XXX with YYY" or "Please add ZZZ between PPP and QQQ".
Please also cite reliable sources to back up your request, without which no information should be added to, or changed in, any article. - Arjayay (talk) 15:22, 17 December 2014 (UTC)

If the puppies are born in winter, which is the minimal air temperature, where they can stay? Can they live in barn with other animals or must they certainly be in houseroom? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.28.79.217 (talk) 09:05, 12 January 2015 (UTC)

Best housed. Just to be sure. Hafspajen (talk) 09:14, 12 January 2015 (UTC)

Wiki Education assignment: English 102

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 9 January 2023 and 5 May 2023. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Amay22 (article contribs). Peer reviewers: Kynew101.

— Assignment last updated by Kynew101 (talk) 17:48, 15 March 2023 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 23 January 2024

puppygood

puppy are good 2600:1700:FE50:59D0:B5DB:C100:5214:7232 (talk) 16:57, 23 January 2024 (UTC)

 Not done: Nonsense request. Keep this up and you'll be blocked. The 🏎 Corvette 🏍 ZR1^{(The Garage)} 17:19, 23 January 2024 (UTC)

Age criterion?

I'm trying to find out what age range a dog is considered a puppy in. Is there a technical sense of the word, with a difference between "puppy" and "whelp"? I haven't found any reliable source. I hoped this article would tell me. --Dan Wylie-Sears 2 (talk) 00:19, 30 April 2024 (UTC)

Usually it's up to 2-3 months when they are still nursing. BTW: A whelp is any young, carnivorous mammal - puppies are whelps. NSX-Racer (talk) 13:29, 3 May 2024 (UTC)