User talk:Grrace

Welcome...

Hello, Grrace, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and ask your question there. Again, welcome! Dana boomer (talk) 20:46, 19 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Mustang article

Hi Grrace! Thank you for your edits to the Mustang article. However, mustangs are feral horses, not wild horses. Changing sourced information and inserting unreliable sources (especially when they deadlink) in the place of reliable sources goes against Wikipedia policy. I've reverted your changes to the article again. I have also started a discussion section on the talk page of the article where we can discuss this if you would like to explain your position. Please do not revert again without discussion and consensus first. Thank you! Dana boomer (talk) 20:49, 19 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Administrative action

Grrace, I have notified the edit warring board here of your actions on the Mustang article. You have continued to add your point of view, despite being asked multiple times in multiple locations to take the issue to the talk page. Dana boomer (talk) 21:47, 19 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You don't seem to be prepared to talk, only revert, so I've blocked you for 24h William M. Connolley (talk) 21:54, 19 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

With regard to your email: you are reverting without talking. This is bad. When you have a conflict, you should be prepared to discuss it. This is one reason why articles have talk pages William M. Connolley (talk) 22:14, 19 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Re your email: Talk:Mustang (horse) William M. Connolley (talk) 23:05, 19 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You blocked my edit while I was typing in citations that included the DNA facts. Mustangs are not "feral," they are a native American species. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Grrace (talk • contribs)

You can leave the citations here, if you'd like, for now. That would make it easier for other editors to start verifying them. They're going to have to be fairly powerful, and very reliable, to be able to counter hundreds of scientific publications saying that horses did go extinct in the Americas (and there are therefore no wild horses) and Mustangs are the descendents of colonial/Spanish horses that were let loose (and therefore feral). Dana boomer (talk) 23:49, 19 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Sources

Per your e-mail, talk pages are just as easy to edit as the articles themselves. You aren't able to edit any page (including talk pages) but your own while you are blocked. You just click on the edit button at the top (or to the side of a section) and add your comments to the bottom of the preceeding comments.

As for your source (Ann Forsten, 1992. Mitochondrial-DNA timetable and the evolution of Equus: Comparison of molecular and paleontological evidence. Ann. Zool. Fennici 28: 301-309.). As far as I can see, all this source says is that there were horses present at one time in North America. It does not say that horses survived through to the present day. Horses went extinct in North America many thousand years ago, and the free roaming horses now living in the west (the mustangs) are descendents of domesticated horses brought by Europeans. As the Mustang article currently says:

Primitive horses lived in North America in prehistoric times, but died out at the end of the last ice age around 10-12,000 years ago, possibly due to climate change or the impact of newly-arrived human hunters.[3] Horses returned to the Americas with the Conquistadors, beginning with Columbus, who imported horses from Spain to the West Indies on his second voyage in 1493.[4] Domesticated horses came to the mainland with the arrival of Cortés in 1519.[5]

And this is all sourced by reliable references. Although the source you have is a nice bit of research and writing, it does not say that horses did not become extinct. If there are some groups that claim that the mustangs should be regarded as wild because many thousands of years ago there were horses in N. America that subsequently went extinct, then please provide reliable references and we will probably be able to work something into the article. However, as you can see, not everyone agrees with your POV, so the wording and references needs to be worked out on talk pages (here for now, the Mustang page once your block expires), rather than the article itself. Dana boomer (talk) 13:24, 20 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Per an article by Deb Baumann, published in The Equestrian News, June 2006, Baumann bases her article on congressional testimony made by Jay F. Kirkpatrick, Ph.D and Patricia M. Fazio, Ph.D. I quote "Equus caballus should be considered North American native wildlife." The article attaches the original congressional statement by Kirkpatrick/Fazio, and I quote it "E. caballus is the genetic equivalent to E. lambei, a horse, according to fossil records, that represented the most recent Equus species in North America prior to extinction." citation is Forsten. The article further points out the migration patterns of "Equus from North America to Eurasia." citation "Horse Evolution" by Kathleen Hunt. Kirkpatrick/Fazio state "feral" is a human construct that has little biological meaning, except transitory behavior, usually forced on the animal in some manner."

Another key Kirkpatrick/Fazio quote, "The key element in describing an animal as a native species is (1) where it originated; and (2) whether or not it co-evolved with its habitat. Clearly, E. caballus did both, here in North America."

I will list all citations here that are listed in the statement made to congress: 1. "Horse Evolution" by Kathleen Hunt from www.onthenet.com.au~stear/horse_evolution.htm;Bruce J. MacFadden, Fossil Horses:Systematics, Paleobiology, and Evolution of the Family Equidae (New York:Cambridge University Press, 1992),p.205. 2. Patricia Mabee Fazio, "The Fight to Save a Memory:Creation of the Prior Mountain Wild Horse Range (1968)and Evolving Federal Wild Horse Protection through 1971," doctoral dissertation, Texas A&M University, College Station, 1995,p.21. 3. Ann Forsten, 1992. Mitochondrial-DNA timetable and the evolution of Equus:Comparison of molecular and paleontological evidence. Ann.Zool. Fennici 28:301-309. 4. Carles Vila, Jennifer A. Leonard, Anders Gotherstrom, Stefan Marklund, Kaj Sandberg, Kerstin Liden, Robert K. Wayne, Hans Ellegren. 2001. Widespread origins of domestic horse lineages. Science 291:474-477. 5. Hofreiter, Michael; Serre,David; Poinar, Hendrik N.; Kuch, Melanie; Paabo, Svante.2001. Ancient DNA. Nature Reviews Genetics. 2(5),353-359. 6. James Dean Feist and Dale R. McCullough. 1976. Behavior patterns and commication in feral horses. Z. Tierpsychol. 41:367.

If you have not read the Jay F. Kirkpatrick, Ph.D and Patricia M. Fazio, Ph.D. STATEMENT, I urge you to do so. It is my intent that Wikipedia update it's erroneous description of American wild horses as being "feral." Just because Equus was driven from North America, does not mean it went extinct from the world. We reintroduce native species back to their rightful habitats all the time, as was done in Mongolia with E. Przewalski when it went extinct hundreds of years ago. Based on the new science, the American wild horse deserves the same serious consideration. Thank you, Grrace (talk) 18:35, 20 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This is another citation regarding E. lambei and Equus available at the link below http://zipcodezoo.com/Key/Animalia/Equus_Genus.asp. 71.116.70.134 (talk) 23:02, 20 March 2009 (UTC) Grrace (talk) 23:15, 20 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Since your block is up, I have moved this conversation to the Mustang talk page and will reply there. This will make it so that other users who are interested in the Mustang page will become aware of our conversation and chip in if they wish. Dana boomer (talk) 13:38, 21 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Reply to Question

Grrace, please see the discussion on the Mustang talk page, where I have proposed a new paragraph for the article dealing with the feral vs. wild issue, and where another editor has chipped in as well. I have been waiting for your input on the new proposed wording (please place that input on the article talk page), which is why I have not placed it into the article yet.

As for your comments on my talk page. Other WP articles cannot be used as sources, and the information there should be taken with a grain of salt. In particular, the feral article needs a lot of work. The intro sentence should actually probably read something like "an animal that has escaped from domestication, or the descendants of that animal". Today's mustangs are the descendants of horses that escaped from domestication, and are by that definition feral. Just because you consider the mustang to be "wild" doesn't mean that everyone else does, or that the WP article should say they are. From the information I have found, the main definition of the mustang used by government agencies and other governing bodies is "feral" - the main proponents of the "wild" argument seem to be just two scientists (Kirkpatrick and Fazio). If you have other sources giving a larger following for the "wild" argument, then please let me know.

As far as "mestengo" goes - I don't have the dictionary edition that is listed as the source for this statement, but I trust the editors who have been working on this article in the past, and I trust them not to misrepresent sources. It's a policy called assume good faith. My edition of Webster's, however, says that "mestango" means stray livestock. I don't see a huge problem in assuming that another version of Webster's says "stray or feral". Besides, you cannot use the argument that just because "mestango" meant "wild stock", it means that mustangs are wild - the source of a word does not transfer meaning from the old word to the new word, if that makes sense.

Please comment on the proposed wording on the Mustang talk page. Thanks! Dana boomer (talk) 14:01, 25 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Dana! Mustangs are wild horses, not feral horses. To be feral you have to have been a captive horse domesticated for some time and then escaped to the wild. Your sources may be reliable, but don't tell the whole story. E.caballus originated in North America as native species. Whether or not man domesticated them is irrelevant, as a large number remained wild, including generations of offspring. Thank you. Grrace (talk) 17:32, 28 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Grrace, please re-read my arguments above. The ancestors of the mustangs were captive horses brought to America by Europeans that had been domesticated for centuries. Some of these captive horses escaped or were abandoned, and then developed into what we today call the Mustang. They are therefore feral - they come from domesticated stock. A feral horse doesn't have to be the individual horse that escaped or was let loose, it can be the descendent of that horse. I'm not sure what you mean by "a large number of them remained wild". Are you saying that Equus caballus never actually died off in North America? Because I'm fairly sure that would be considered a fringe theory, and I have yet to see a reference that backs that up. True wild horses went extinct in North America several thousand years ago. Then domesticated horses were reintroduced several hundred years ago, and today's mustangs are the descendents of those domesticated horses - therefore feral. I will also reply to your questions on the Mustang page. Dana boomer (talk) 21:28, 28 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Dana, you stated above "From the information I have found, the main definition of the mustang used by government agencies and other governing bodies is "feral" - the main proponents of the "wild" argument seem to be just two scientists (Kirkpatrick and Fazio)." My first question is why are you relying on government agencies definition of "feral" vs. "wild" over scientific evidence? Government agencies are not scientists and have a conflict of interest, presently. Also, the "just two scientists" comment brings me to my next question...how many scientists do you need? I have a load of them, want more links? Thank you. Grrace (talk) 18:28, 29 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Please take this discussion to the Mustang talk page - having this discussion in two different places makes things difficult. Dana boomer (talk) 18:33, 29 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Mustang: feral or not...

mustang |ˈməsˌta ng | noun an American feral horse, typically small and lightly built.
(Oxford American Dictionary
___
mustang Pronunciation: ‚m„s-ƒtaŠ Function: noun Etymology: Mexican Spanish mestengo, from Spanish, stray, from mesteño strayed, from mesta annual roundup of cattle that disposed of strays, from Medieval Latin (animalia) mixta mixed animals Date: 1808
(Webster's Dictionary)

1 : the small hardy naturalized horse of the western plains directly descended from horses brought in by the Spaniards; also : bronco
___
feral Pronunciation: ‚fir-„l, ‚fer- Function: adjective Etymology: Medieval Latin feralis, from Latin fera wild animal, from feminine of ferus wild— more at fierce Date: 1604

1 : of, relating to, or suggestive of a wild beast 2 a : not domesticated or cultivated : wild b : having escaped from domestication and become wild
Webster's Dictionary) __

IHMO, Grrace, Oxford and Websters are superior sources to WP. It may be advisable for Wiki contributors to do some research for reliable sources before categorically making prescriptive statements and causing debates that may be defeating the object of talk pages, and injure the sensibilities of serious editors. --Kudpung (talk) 21:29, 30 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]