Talk:Doberman Pinscher

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

	Dogs Portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Dogs, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to articles on Canines on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.
B	This article has been rated as B-Class on the Project's quality scale.
Article Grading: The article has been rated for quality and/or importance but has no comments yet. If appropriate, please review the article and then leave comments to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the article and what work it needs.

	Germany Portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Germany, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to articles related to Germany on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please join the project and help with our open tasks.
B	This article has been rated as B-Class on the Project's quality scale. (If you rated the article please give a short summary at comments to explain the ratings and/or to identify the strengths and weaknesses.)
	This article lacks sufficient references and/or adequate inline citations. Once references have been added, please remove the unref=yes switch of the {{WikiProject Germany}} template on this page.

	It is requested that a photograph or photographs be included in this article to improve its quality, if possible. Preferred photos show the complete animal, head to tail. Additional photos should add information, such as a face-only shot or distinct coat color or texture variants. Please do not include restricted copyright or "fair use" images.
	Special request: blue dobermann

Contents 1 Why this page is named Dobermann, not Doberman or Doberman Pinscher 2 Other topics 3 Genetic description clarification 4 What makes a "famous" Dobie 5 REQUESTED PHOTOS 6 Tags 7 English commonwealth spelling 8 Which photo to use 9 reputation of loyal? 10 "External links" 11 Image with tail 12 Famous Dobermanns 13 Temperament 14 Dog as a whole 15 german shepherd stock used? 16 Weight 17 Velcro dogs 18 There is no 'Doberman' 19 Page move 20 Duplicate article 21 <3

[edit] Why this page is named Dobermann, not Doberman or Doberman Pinscher

I've moved the page to Dobermann because the breed is known by this name by the kennel clubs of Australia, New Zealand, the UK and by the international association (the FCI). The American and Canadian kennel clubs use "Doberman Pinscher", so I think we should go with the majority. I hope this is OK with everyone -- sannse 08:37 Apr 5, 2003 (UTC)

This is NOT OK with everyone, and majority has nothing to do with this. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 128.146.236.221 (talk • contribs).

The majority? Which clubs have the most members? I believe its the American and Canadian ones, no?—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 69.203.192.143 (talk • contribs) .

i disagree, i think we should go with the name it was originally given. --andrew 17:00, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

I disagree as well, I think the majority of people call these dogs Doberman Pinschers, and the article should reflect that --Dobelover12725 18:21, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

Before this goes too far, I would encourage you to read Talk:Gasoline/archive2#Article_name. All of it. By the time you're done (and/or have you died of old age or self-inflicted wounds), I think any desire to argue over the article name will have passed. -- Coneslayer 18:23, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

A quick googlefight shows 3,930,000 hits for Doberman, and 2,460,000 results for Dobermann, I think the article needs to be renamed to reflect this --Dobelover12725 05:15, 29 July 2006 (UTC)

Googling is probably the worst possible means imaginable of sampling usage. Reference works (Britannica and the like) use "Doberman Pinscher". Urhixidur 14:44, 29 July 2006 (UTC)

Yes I know Googling isn't the greatest, but at least it's something. The Encarta Encyclopedia also uses Doberman Pinscher, btw --Dobelover12725 20:24, 29 July 2006 (UTC)

As I explain below, Dobermann is the name of the orignal breeder and therefore is the correct name - remember, it is a German name not English. Also, it does not need moving as both Doberman and Doberman Pinscher redirect here anyway. Why move it? I haven't seen any compelling arguments here. -Localzuk ^(talk) 19:39, 1 August 2006 (UTC)

This makes no sense. If you cite the American Kennel Club for breed standards, they why would you not use the American/Canadian spelling used by the AKC? The reason to move the page is because "Doberman" is simply more common than "Dobermann." Even if you don't like Google, that fact is tha many of the hits for the "mann" spelling are actually to pages with the "man" spelling that list the former as an alternate. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Dogs run (talk • contribs) .

The thing is, the article cites all the kennel clubs. Not just the AKC, it cites the FCI the NZKC, etc... AKC is just listed first (probably due to alphabetical order) - Trysha ^(talk) 19:17, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

Not quite. The article starts out "According to the AKC breed standard, a Dobermann..." This is inconsistent. Also notice that ALL of the clubs/societies listed at the end of the article use the "man" spelling. The AKC probably has three or four times the number of dogs than the next biggest club. (Also, the AKC breed standard does not mention weights, or if they do, I can't find them.) Perhaps a compromise would be to list the "mann" spelling on the German version of Wikipedia, and the "man" spelling on the English(American) version, since we are, after all, using the American spelling. This isn't the same as gasoline/petrol, but commonsense dictates that if you use "color" instead of "colour", etc., then the rest of the Article uses American spelling.128.146.236.221 20:46, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

"...commonsense dictates that if you use "color" instead of "colour", etc...." This is the first part of this dreary argument that actually makes any sense. The article was moved from Doberman Pinscher to Dobermann shortly after it was created, but it wasn't until here that there was enough text to show whether the spelling of the article was British or American (it was the latter). By priority, the spelling should be changed to British throughout, I suppose, but Wikipedia:Manual of Style#National varieties of English is most adamant that it should all be the same.--Curtis Clark 22:07, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

"According to what I have found on spelling, "If no such words can be agreed upon [i.e., English versus American spelling]...the dialect of the first significant contributor (not a stub) should be used." By this rule, is it not true that the American spelling should be used? If it was created using the American spelling of Doberman, then it should stay with the American spelling. This is perhaps dreary to some, but, of course, no one is forced into participating in an argument.--Dogs run 18:45, 5 August 2006 (UTC)

The recent change from "color" to "colour" now makes the article consistent in terms of British vs. American usage. Anyone who attempts to either move the article to Doberman pinscher or change back to American spelling will be in violation of the guidelines, and subject to immediate reversion. There's only one right way to make such a change at this point: move the article and change the spelling at the same time. And I'm hoping no one does that without getting a consensus here.--Curtis Clark 19:25, 19 August 2006 (UTC)

Curtis, you admitted that the point at which there was enough text demonstrated American spelling. By Wikipedia rules, American spelling should therefore be used from that point on. How do you justify (besides simply the fact that you WANT it to be so) changing to English spelling? By your logic, since English spelling was used for some words, then using if for all words justifies the conversion. I can make the same argument for American spelling, except for the fact that American spelling was used first, and therefore should be used thereafter. By the way, I cannot see how one can talk about AKC standards for a DobermaNN, when it is the American Kennel Club.Dogs run 17:27, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

Admittedly there is an inconsistency here: The article name is Dobermann, so that spelling should be used throughout the article (WP:MOS is clear about consistency of spelling). But the rest of the article is in American English. Rather than see the whole thing degenerate into a "yanks v. poms" fracas, perhaps we should agree that the article needs to be either Doberman pinscher with American spelling or Dobermann with Commonwealth spelling, and then seek a consensus among the editors for which to use. (I really don't care as much about the result as the process; I'm a Yank, but I'm not offended when I read "colour").--Curtis Clark 19:57, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

• • The Doberman Pinscher derived its name from Louis Dobermann of Apolda, Thuringia, whose breeding experiments were reputedly involved in its early development. After his death in 1894, the Germans named the breed Dobermann-pinscher in his honor, but a half century later dropped the pinscher on the grounds that this German word for terrier was no longer appropriate. The British did the same thing a few years later.

[The Doberman Pinscher Club of America] Dos lingo 20:00, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

Doberman is a common misspelling. So is expresso (meaning espresso). Calling a misspelling "American spelling" and justifying the use of it in that way is weird. If common belief dictates what is right, then we will have to consider a few more articles for revisions. :) --Friðrik Bragi Dýrfjörð 10:59, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Other topics

I can't really get a good image layout here because there is so little text for an article with a table and two other images. What we really need is more text for balance - any volunteers? ;) In particular we need information on cropped ears - we have two images but no explanation. This is not a subject I am likely to give a NPOV on, but I'll put it on my to-do-list anyway. If someone with more knowledge and some neutral views on the subject can get there before me that would be great -- sannse 21:41, 20 Aug 2003 (UTC)

---

I've moved this from the article... it doesn't really add much infomation. A diagram showing which part of the ear is cropped would be more useful IMO. fabiform | talk 21:43, 19 Mar 2004 (UTC)

Considering the different breed standards between the foreign "Dobermann" ass. and DPCA maybe you should refer to the foreign dogs as Dobermann's and American dogs as Doberman Pinchers. After all the Germans and British and several other countries no longer permit tail docking and ear cropping while the US does. I do not think it is necessary for Wikipedia to change spellings or favor one country's spellings over another. List them under both. If you are going to favor one over the other, remember the US has more native English speaking people than any other country so you might want to use the US spellings. The breed standards are different enough to have caused the formation of the United Doberman Club which uses the FCI breed discription and believes in testing the doberman where the DPCA does not promote schutzhund. Judging by the individual standards can effect placement therefore possible championships. As far as non-native English speakers, would they not be looking things up in their own language or use page translate? I donn't care what is one more "n" annyhow?

The breed standards are not that different; German dogs are easily recognized as DPs in the US. Wikipedia has to favor spellings, since an article appears only one place; the alternatives (for example, Doberman Pinscher) are handled by redirects. It is likely that more people speak English in southern Asia (although not as a first language) than all the other English speakers in the world put together.--Curtis Clark 20:42, 3 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Genetic description clarification

I'm not quite understanding the genetic description of how the colorations work. So let me explain from the beginning what I'm not getting: In a simple situation, the dog inherits one gene from its mother and one from its father, so it *always* has two genes. The form of each gene can be dominant or recessive; e.g., let's say that green is the dominant color for frogs and red is the recessive color. If the frog has GG, GR, or RG, then it is green; if it has RR, it is red. But in this case we're talking about the dog having 4 color variants, which you can't have in this situation--even if the combination of an R and G somehow makes a chartreuse frog rather than green, there are only 3 color combinations possible-- green (GG), chartreuse (RG or GR), or red (RR).

Right.

I think what you're saying is that there are 2 separate *sets* of genes that control the color.

Yes, that's what I meant to say. I guess the proper term would be two genotypes, which I'm not sure that I used in the article. I was trying to avoid "genotype" and "phenotype", as they seemed a little too technical; but you're right. The Dobermann has TWO color genotypes, one (let's say D & d) that determines if the coat stays black or blue, let's call it "color": (DD, Dd, dD are all black or blue, and dd is either red or fawn). And the other (G & g) determines something else, let's call it "hue". So, Gg, GG, gG are all either black or red, and gg is either blue or fawn. Combining these two genotypes, we'd get:

• DDGG: Black
• DDGg: Black
• DDgG: Black
• DDgg: Blue
• DdGG: Black
• DdGg: Black
• DdgG: Black
• Ddgg: Blue
• dDGG: Black
• dDGg: Black
• dDgG: Black
• dDgg: Blue
• ddGG: Red
• ddGg: Red
• ddgG: Red
• ddgg: Fawn

(BTW, the way I call them "color" and "hue", there are official names for both these genotypes--I don't think either of those are correct, as I just made them up for this example. I've got a book somewhere that gives the specific genotype names; I'll look it up if you think it'll make the article easier for the reader to understand. Or, do you think all this is getting too technical for an article about a dog species?)

Above, you can see that 9/16 alleles (is that the right term?) produce the most common, Black Doberman. Blue and Red are each produced by 3/16 of the alleles. And the last 1/16, the rarest, makes Fawn. The genes aren't all evenly dispersed though: The "d" recessive gene is far more common than the "g" recessive, which explains why Red Dobermans are so much more prevalent than Blue ones. The Blue and Fawn Doberman is born far less frequently than 3/16 and 1/16 of the time, respectively, due to the rarity of the "g". However (I'm not 100% sure), I think the distribution between "D" and "d" is roughly 50/50, because the Red Doberman does seem to occur about 25% of the Black. For example, my dog was one of 13. 3 of them were red. Neither parent was. Again, if you think we should include this, I'll have to do some more researching.

In other words, there's one gene pair that's GG, GR, RG, or RR; there's another pair that can be, say, either A or B, where A is dominant, so there can also be an AA, AB, BA, and BB. So I *think* what you're saying is that if the first gene pair contains G (GG, RG, GR), then it is what you're calling "dominant", and if the second gene pair has A anywhere (AA,AB,BA) then it is "dominant", and then the RR and BB versions are "recessive".

Yes, that's how I was using the two terms. Something's only considered to be a recessive phenotype (physical manifestation of the genes) if both the genes in the genotype are recessive (i.e., "carriers" [AB, BA, RG, GR] are generally not considered to have the recessive gene, even though they carry it). Maybe we should use the terms "homozygous" and "heterozygous" instead? Again--how technical do you think we should make this? I mean, as long as we link it to pages on genetics, I think it should be OK to use technical terms when discussing genetic variations, no?

This does give me four color possibilities. Is this right? If so, I'm glad to try rephrasing things so that it's clearer because it took me a while to figure this out. Elf | Talk 20:28, 10 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Yup, be my guest. It took me a long time to figure out how to phrase it all so that it didn't sound confusing. But, even after writing it, I felt it was likely going to be hard to understand, especially for people who know nothing about Dobermans and/or genetics. I figured I should just put it down there and that someone would eventually come along and make it less confusing. BTW, in case you found the part on albinism confusing...ANY of the 16 combinations above can lead to an albino Doberman, since the recessive homozygous albinism gene inhibits the pigment proteins from being created in the first place, no matter what color the pigment is (just like in humans--there are white albinos, black albinos, Asian albinos, etc, and they all look "whiter" than any of them would otherwise look).64.12.117.16 03:23, 14 Jul 2004 (UTC)

OK, thanks for clarifying. I'll try to take a look at rephrasing. I agree that we won't really want detailed/technical discussion about genetics here, but a summary of why there are 4 colors genetically is (IMHO) kind of interesting. Elf | Talk 22:03, 20 Jul 2004 (UTC)

A good description of the genetics of color can be found at: http://www.dpca.org/color.chart.5.html. A very useful page of links is at: http://www.dpca.org/DobeAbout.html.--Dogs run 18:54, 5 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] What makes a "famous" Dobie

I removed "Prinz v Norden Stamm" from Famous Dobies. His fame appears to be simply that he was a successful champion show dog and popular sire. There've got to be thousands of dogs, including other Dobies, for which this is true. "Famous" should be distinguished in some way that the "man on the street" might have heard of or would be interested in, not merely famous among Dobie breeders. Elf | Talk 18:45, 16 July 2005 (UTC)

Yes, I agree. Quill 22:05, 21 July 2005 (UTC)

for once i think elf is right, but i also think there should be a section for dobermann crufts winners —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Lucianotis (talk • contribs) .

[edit] REQUESTED PHOTOS

Would like photos of:

• Dobie with uncropped ears and undocked tail
• Dobie with cropped ears

Elf | Talk 18:09, 19 September 2005 (UTC)

the doberman pinscher, should be medium not large, large doberman tand to be sick, and look very ugly.

Should the image that exists be replaced with a less blurred one also? If so, I will try and get one of our dobermann at some point in a pose similar to that one. -localzuk 01:10, 25 December 2005 (UTC)

I think it would be nice with a image less blurred for the article. Lennart.larsen 13:52, 25 December 2005 (UTC)

If interested I could supply a picture of my male fawn (uncropped ears, docked tail).N8sbug 15:13, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Tags

I have added the not-verified and informal tone tags for this article as it appears to have very few references to back up a lot of apparrently POV comments. It also contains a lot of emotive and informal language. It could do with a general cleanup really. I will post more detailed reasoning if people ask for it - but I think it is rather obvious from reading the article -localzuk 01:09, 25 December 2005 (UTC)

Wow, a lot of that stuff got added while I was on a wiki vacation. :-) I'll try to edit sometime soon if I can. Elf | Talk 18:20, 26 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] English commonwealth spelling

I think that due to the article being presented in commonwealth english it is natural that the spelling in the article be commonwealth also, this is also following the rules of editing on this site —The preceding unsigned comment was added by SlayerX326 (talk • contribs) .

The rules of editing on this site are leave it in the commonwealth or american version in which it exists in most cases; what other spelling makes you think it's primarily in commonwealth eng? Elf | Talk 21:53, 12 January 2006 (UTC)

From what I can see is the measurements are in imperial (US) units and the words such as colour is spelled 'color' - so it seems like US English to me. -Localzuk (talk) 23:35, 12 January 2006 (UTC)

I just found it odd that an article be written in american english with a commonwealth english title. If nobody else shares this view then it is fine with me. The title is why I believed it to be a commonwealth article.—The preceding unsigned comment was added by SlayerX326 (talk • contribs) .

I think 'Dobermann' is the name of the original breeder so is not really commonwealth english - it is German. -Localzuk (talk) 19:41, 13 January 2006 (UTC)

OK, understood. Might be helpful to know that, the way the the Wikipedia:WikiProject Dog Breeds decided on names of articles is by most common spelling among all major english-language kennel clubs, so the content of the article would be more indicative of the language variant used than the title. (Especially interesting to note how many breeds there are with perfectly understandable English-language breed names...that almost no one uses, preferring the non-English versions. It's like the Fédération Cynologique Internationale (World Canine Organisation)--no one in the american-english dog world calls it the World Canine Organization, they all call it the FCI and wrestle, usually badly, with the french full name. :-) ) Elf | Talk 19:47, 13 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Which photo to use

Anyone have any preference on which photo to use on the page for now (agreed that both are not as clear as desireable and a better photo thatn these would be even better, but we ain't got one at the moment)? Choices appear to be:

.

Elf | Talk 21:38, 23 January 2006 (UTC)

• My vote goes for the right hand one. The detail on the face is not perfect but it is far less blurry. We have a good pic of a face later in the article which serves to show the detail that is lost.-Localzuk ^(talk) 21:44, 23 January 2006 (UTC)
• I think it's hard to decide, over exposed and out of focus or blurry and or just plain blurry. Neither? :) For some reason i like the left better, if the overexposure could be corrected on the right then maybe the right one - Trysha ^(talk) 23:15, 23 January 2006 (UTC)

The exposure of the right hand one has been corrected as much as can be. Any more and it looks washed out and wrong. I cannot see the image being blurry myself. It is much less blurry than the original. -Localzuk ^(talk) 23:19, 23 January 2006 (UTC)

• I prefer the one on the left, the stack is much better, and I think it's a better representaion of the way the dog actually looks --Dobelover12725 18:26, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

Here is a better image if you want to use it:

[edit] reputation of loyal?

At least in Spain, Dobermann's (vulgar) reputation is of treachery, being seen as dogs able to suddenly attack their owner. The article kind of negates this reputation...--euyyn 18:05, 20 February 2006 (UTC)

All I can say is 'references'. From everything I have seen, read, experienced - the Dobermann is a loyal dog and has a reputation of being loyal. If you can provide references to the otherwise then do so but if not, we should stick with what is there. I have added references to these claims now. -Localzuk ^(talk) 18:27, 20 February 2006 (UTC)

Well I certainly don't know where can I find references to support that some popular belief exists... Any idea?

I don't doubt dobermann are loyal, I simply say that (at least in spain), there exists a prejudice against them. --euyyn 01:31, 23 February 2006 (UTC)

I did read when getting those references that it is known that there are some bad 'strain's' of dobermann's due to bad breeding, so I do not doubt that they are likely seen in a bad light due to this sort of problem. For the references, I would suggest looking at any societies, clubs and organisations such as those in the USA and UK that I posted references to. Also, take a look at any dobermann books that originate there. You may also find some in newspapers. -Localzuk ^(talk) 10:25, 23 February 2006 (UTC)

I think that the article should have something like this as Dobermanns are one of the most feared dogs in the world. And its not just from films and bad breeding, a large part of the negative image of dobermanns comes from the second world war where dobermanns were used to guard concentration camps and flush out the members of the resistance in France Lazmac 18:15, 27 February 2006 (UTC)

Uh.. i believe the German Shephard would take that role. Dobermans where extensively by both sides. German shephards were more commonly used by Nazis to terrorize captives.

This doesn't really have much to do with loyalty though. However, if you wish to add something, please ensure you cite references as this article is in dire need of some in-line references.-Localzuk ^(talk) 17:38, 10 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] "External links"

As Monkeyman said on a user page, "There is a standard format for the external link section here." As much as I hate to revert anything Elf has done, I think it's worth following the guidelines (there's an alternative mentioned there that might look better, btw).--Curtis Clark 01:19, 6 March 2006 (UTC)

I appreciate the sentiment. :-) However, subheads look really bad especially with only a few links underneath. I chnged to the ; format here but I don't think the nested bullets look bad and anyway I think it's consistent among dog breed articles. (OK, that's juts because I don't want to go find them all and change them. But someone should. But not to === subheads. Yuck.) Elf | Talk 02:34, 6 March 2006 (UTC)

I agree about the appearance of subheads, but I've seen how screen readers render HTML, and read accounts by people who use them, who appreciate the list of headers they provide, as a way of rapidly understanding the structure of a page. The nested bullets achieve roughly the same thing; since it is a style guide, maybe we should add them as a third alternative.--Curtis Clark 04:32, 6 March 2006 (UTC)

Note to self: View source before expounding. The ; format creates a definition list, which is perfectly fine structured markup. I'd still support nested lists if you think we should take that on at Wikipedia_talk:External_links, but I'm okay with the <dl>.--Curtis Clark 04:39, 6 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Image with tail

http://flickr.com/photos/thebilly/26185145/ - He doesn't look much like a Dobermann to me, but who am I to doubt his owner? pfctdayelise (translate?) 15:11, 12 April 2006 (UTC)

He is overweight and has very light markings on his face. I would say it is a bad example really. -Localzuk ^(talk) 15:30, 12 April 2006 (UTC)

Labradober?--Curtis Clark 18:05, 12 April 2006 (UTC)

Heh. I dunno, it definately has dobie face (although as I said, the markings seem very light) - it just is very fat. I standing picture would be good. I prefer 'doberdor' myself :)-Localzuk ^(talk) 18:44, 12 April 2006 (UTC)

I may be able to get a picture of a natural Doberman, without cropped ears, and a full length tail, I know someone that owns one, I'll see what I can do. She looks a lot more like a Doberman that the dog pictured ;) --Dobelover12725 18:32, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Famous Dobermanns

I believe that the Dobermanns named "Roscoe and Desoto" were from "The Chipmunk Movie" and not "Oliver and Company". It also might be interesting to note that the names come from two streets "Roscoe" and "Desoto", which intersect each other in Los Angeles's San Fernando Valley.

The dobermans "Roscoe" and "Desoto" are from "Oliver and Company" they are the dogs used by the villan, Sykes. Just check out the movie's page.—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 4.239.75.177 (talk • contribs).

[edit] Temperament

I just reverted an edit that I found to be very POV (and illplaced in the article), but then I looked at the history of the last couple of days and the associated talk pages of the involved users, and I felt bad about not talking about it here first. It looks like we need to reach a consensus on the best way to present the temperament of the Dobermann. I agree with the statements I reverted, but I still feel they were too strongly worded. So, I would suggest including in the temperament section something about media misconceptions about Dobermanns (i.e. their supposed ferocity) with a good citation to back it up. --Joelmills 02:26, 26 May 2006 (UTC)

Although I disagree with Lucianotis's "vigor", I think he makes good points. I've tried to take an even stance in the first paragraph, and I've expanded the Temperament section to include many if not most of his points. I welcome additional edits in that section, and I suggest that he add his references to the list at the end of the article, if they are not already there. (I am personally a very POV dobie partisan, but I think the dogs themselves make a better case for the breed than all our pleadings.)--Curtis Clark 03:22, 27 May 2006 (UTC)

I actually got in an edit conflict with you just now on moving the media representation stuff to the temperament section, but you did a much better job than I did. I really like it as it is now, very even-handed. --Joelmills 03:26, 27 May 2006 (UTC)

Oops, sorry; I hate it when that happens. But thanks for the support.--Curtis Clark 04:20, 27 May 2006 (UTC)

I tried to add some information that I found from the CDC on dog bite incidents, but I didn't reference it correctly. Can someone kindly fix this for me? This section is somewhat weak, considering the generally gentle nature of this breed.--Dogs run 18:49, 5 August 2006 (UTC)

I took the word "liberation" straight from the Wikipedia page on Guam. That is, in fact, a neutral point of view. There are book written with this title, as cited on the Guam page.

I changed this to be Battle of Guam and added the wikilink to the battle. Battle is a neutral word. The term 'Liberation' favors the side of the victor. The term 'Invasion' favors the losing side. It's a battle from both points of view. - Trysha ^(talk) 01:19, 11 August 2006 (UTC)

I agree with this wording (especially since it has its own Wikilink). Dobermanns are too often stigmatized by people "on the other side" of a conflict, when the dogs are just doing their jobs, and it is the people who are polarized.--Curtis Clark 03:21, 11 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Dog as a whole

I've already read before that the doberman has proven superior to most dogs in intelligence, strength, general ability, and loyalty, basing on statistics, contests, and other related tests. I believe it would be nice to provide a little section on the breeds accomplishments, its awards and the such.—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 69.203.192.143 (talk • contribs) .

[edit] german shepherd stock used?

im just curious, this is the only article regarding dobis that i've ever seen mention german shepherd dogs being "the single largest contributor" to the doberman breed. do we have any sources for this claim? --andrew 17:01, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

• • There are no records, only speculation, as to the dogs which went into the creation of the original Doberman, but it is documented that crosses were made to two of the English breeds around the turn of the century, using the Black and Tan Manchester Terrier and the black English Greyhound, in order to improve the Doberman's appearance. It is generally accepted as fact that the two German breeds, which played a major role in the Doberman's ancestry were: the old German Shepherd, now extinct: and the German Pinscher - the ancestors of the Rottweiler and the Weimaraner.

[The Doberman Pinscher Club of America] Dos lingo 20:34, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Weight

a 100 pounds domerman pincsher is to big, a weight of 80 pounds (36 kg) is sounds better —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 85.130.148.195 (talk • contribs).

I imagine the weights are from a breed standard. It's true that some modern breeders aim for the heavy end of the standard, resulting in large dogs with shorter life spans.--Curtis Clark 04:58, 7 November 2006 (UTC)

you right', according to the doberman club of america the weight of the dog is 55-90 pounds,

Where in the AKC breed standards are ideal weights specified?Dogs run 17:18, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Velcro dogs

The unreferenced assertion by 65.60.249.38/Dogs run that Dobermanns are "Velcro dogs" pretty much has to be original research, since I and I'm sure many other editors can cite plenty of counterexamples (and plenty of dogs in other breeds that are Velcro dogs). Rather than get into an edit war, I'm modifying the sentence to indicate that it is not a uniform feature of the breed.--Curtis Clark 14:47, 22 December 2006 (UTC)

I did not say (nor is it necessarily true) that all Dobes are called Velcro dogs. My point is that a characteristic of the breed is there tendancy to stick close to their owners, thus the Velcro characteristic. Please see my JFK example: is it original research to state that John F. Kennedy was also called JFK?Dogs run 01:49, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

I assumed good faith [1], but even my changed wording was removed by 63.3.11.2 during the spelling wars [2]. I will change it back to the way I left it. However, your statement, "Stop removing this. It is clear that this is common usage and does not require either reference or attribution. Either leave it alone, or show me why it isn't well established." is ridiculous. It is up to you to show that it is well established, and your analogy to JFK is off the mark, since there are plenty of references for that. Bottom line: don't expect others to do your homework for you.--Curtis Clark 07:17, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

Curtis, when something is common usage, it does not need to be referenced. I can find hundreds and hundreds of examples of the use of this term to refer to the characteristics of the Dobe, some in books, some in articles about Dobes, some in the news media, and everyone in our rescue group in Central Ohio uses the term, as do people at dog shows, I've heard breeders use it (Montwood Kennels, etc.). There is no one single reference that would suffice, just as you would not find one single reference to JFK or FDR being Kennedy or Roosevelt. There is no reference to how long a Dobe lives, or the fact that they are intelligent, or any other characteristic. The fact that Dobes like to stick close to their owners (as my two are doing, lying at my feet) is a well established characteristic of the breed, and it is commonly referred to as "Velcro." The key word is common.Dogs run 23:30, 15 January 2007 (UTC)

Considering that others are inclined to delete it in its entirety (I'm fine with it saying "some"), perhaps you should create an article Velcro dog that isn't just a redirect here, which this article can cite. (Mine is velcro only in the evening, I've known several that were not velcro at all, and I've heard of dobies that were more teflon. My springer spaniel is velcro all the time except when he's in the field.)--Curtis Clark 04:39, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

Velcro dog redirects here? Oh, absolutely not. 'Velcro dog' is a general term to describe any dog that really, really wants to be near his or her owner all the time. That's not a dobermann-only trait. I'm creating a stub there. Others can nominate for deletion or edit as they please, but it should not redirect here. -- Vary | Talk 04:52, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

And if the 'velcro' reference stays in this article at all, we should use Curtis's proposed wording. -- Vary | Talk

We do have references for how long a dobie lives - the various kennel club articles provide this sort of info. The problem with the term 'velcro dog' is that, yes, dobies are known for being loyal and sticking close to you but we need evidence that this term is actually used to describe them.

Also, you state that we don't need to reference common usage terms, but the problem is that this isn't a term in common usage! OK, we don't have to reference things like 'water is wet' or 'English people are from England' but we do have to reference things when they are being questioned.-Localzuk^(talk) 07:43, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

I quit. This is absurd. I was just trying to offset all the aggressive discourse that everyone has included. Dobes are not aggressive. Whoever wrote this article makes them sound like killers. They're not. They make exceptional companions and are incredibly friendly. Just forget it, I'll stick to genetics.Dogs run 02:03, 18 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] There is no 'Doberman'

The name of the article is "Dobermann". In some countries, that breed is called "Doberman Pinscher". To the best of my knowledge, there is no kennel club in the English-speaking world that refers to the breed as "Doberman"; if I am wrong, then certainly it is a minority opinion.

Since the name of the article is "Dobermann", that is the spelling that should be used throughout. WP:MOS states "Each article should have uniform spelling and not a haphazard mix of different spellings." What can be more haphazard that never spelling it the same as the article title? I notice that much of it is in Commonwealth spelling, which would also favor "Dobermann", but the main point is that "Dobermann" is the article title.

I frankly don't care whether the article title and the words within are "Dobermann" or "Doberman Pinscher", but I do care that the article be consistent. So either move it to "Doberman Pinscher", change "Dobermann" to "Doberman Pinscher" throughout the article, and perhaps change the spelling to American English, or else leave it alone. This is an encyclopedia, not a forum for disagreements over national varieties of English.--Curtis Clark 18:36, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

As the article states as the reference AKC uses Doberman not Dobermann as well as the The Doberman Pinscher Club of America and also WP:ENGVAR.Articles should use the same dialect throughout. Each article should have uniform spelling and not a haphazard mix of different spellings 63.3.11.2 18:44, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

I see you truly don't understand what I'm trying to say, but perhaps now that the article has been moved, you will be kind enough to allow the spelling to be consistent. And please be careful of the three revert rule in the future.--Curtis Clark 21:46, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

I'm guessing I should have changed it to "Doberman Pinscher" throughout the article instead of just "Doberman." I believe that "Doberman Pinscher" is the better to use since it is the full and usually regarded proper name of the breed

But I do not know how to change the main title of a page. That one guy did it for this page, how come I couldn't? Is it because of age restrictions, or did he have a special permit to do so? Did my "clumsy spelling mistakes" restrict me from doing so? I really do not want to get in some deep "shih tzu" with you guys; I just wanted to know how he changed the page title.Template:Unsigned:Uzzo2

It's the "Move" tab at the top of the page.--Curtis Clark 03:35, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

Thanks, CC. --Uzzo2 00:10, 31 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Page move

I have moved the page to Doberman Pinscher based on the consensus of this talk page as well as the American Kennel Club (AKC) and the Doberman Pinscher Club of America (DPCA) are the two main citations for this article as listed in the "reference" section.Also see WP:MOS Dos lingo 20:53, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

• Those of us who spent a tremendous amount of time in the first 3 years or so of the dog project believed that, since this is a multinational encyclopedia, primary breed names should be chosen based first on the predominant use by different clubs in the English-speaking world, not by how many dogs are registered with each of the various clubs. If you haven't all looked at the research for these names, I encourage you to do so. "Dobermann" was used by more clubs and, further, we often looked at the choices of the FCI, which is a truly international breed organization, so we felt that that was a better primary name for the article.

What the AKC says or thinks should have nothing to do with the titles of breed articles. If this article comes across as being primarily about the AKC breed, that's a shame that it's gotten that way and needs to be fixed. Likewise it shouldn't be an FCI article or a Kennel Club article or whatever; it should address the breed in general and discuss similarites and differences among the various breed organizations worldwide.

I'm not saying that it can't be labeled "Dobermann Pinscher" rather than "Dobermann", but it should be based on multinational reasoning to keep in the spirit of Wikipedia.

Elf | Talk 05:05, 18 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Duplicate article

There is a (long) similar article at Dobermann (European type) which should obviously merged with this one. It appears to be an exact copy of the FCI standard with a bit about temperament. I would do it myself, but I'm rather busy with other stuff at the time, so I thought I'd bring it up here and hope that someone is kind enough to do it. --Pharaoh Hound (talk) 23:00, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

I have blanked it and listed it as a copyright violation for an admin to check over. If it is decided that I am wrong then I will put it up for afd as the info is already in this article and the name is an unlikely search term so a redirect would be pointless.-Localzuk^(talk) 23:05, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] <3

i really like this dog.