Talk:Tarpan (disambiguation)

This disambiguation page is within the scope of WikiProject Disambiguation, an attempt to structure and organize all disambiguation pages on Wikipedia. If you wish to help, you can edit the page attached to this talk page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project or contribute to the discussion.DisambiguationWikipedia:WikiProject DisambiguationTemplate:WikiProject DisambiguationDisambiguation articles

Disambiguation[edit]

Complete disambiguation of links to this page will need to wait some days or weeks for "ghost links" formerly transcluded via Template:Equine to clear from the database. In the meantime, I will fix all the real links I find. --Una Smith (talk) 02:17, 25 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This disambiguation page includes several equines because according to their respective articles, each is know at least sometime as a tarpan. Such ambiguity is a vexing problem with common names and the reason why so many Wikipedia articles on plants and animals use scientific names. --Una Smith (talk) 05:13, 25 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It also contains a bred-back recreation and an ass. The most common use of the term is to refer to the extinct wild horse. I did a rephrase but kept both of the articles you listed. Hope that is a reasonable compromise. Montanabw^(talk) 06:00, 25 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I see that Tarpan has been moved to Equus ferus ferus; if a disambiguation page for Tarpan is really needed it would have been better to move it to Tarpan (horse) in my opinion, as that is its common name. I think we need to be cautious with creating disambiguation pages for everything. Simple explanation in articles and/or comments atv the top of articles is often sufficient in my opinion. Peter Maas\^talk 22:48, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I see your point, Peter. Unfortunately, "tarpan" is a common name of three different equines, including a domestic horse breed (the Heck horse). --Una Smith (talk) 03:54, 30 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Actually Peter, the term "Tarpan" primarily refers to the extinct horse. I have no clue how the Kiang got into this, as the wiki article there has no source for the statement. The Heck Horse is NOT a tarpan, though some may choose to call it one. I disfavored this move, it was done absent consensus, but I also can't fight every single battle on Wikipedia. Montanabw^(talk) 00:34, 31 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Mystery links to Tarpan, no idea how to disambiguate them:

Ancestor worship --Una Smith (talk) 08:02, 30 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Probably discussing the primitive horse, pick your article. Or maybe ask on that article's talk page. Probably not the vehicle! Montanabw^(talk) 00:34, 31 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The usual practice is to tag the link with {{dn}}; I have done that. Mentioning it here is for the sake of "institutional memory". --Una Smith (talk) 02:10, 31 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Tarpan moved unilaterally without discussion[edit]

I just discovered that Tarpan was moved without any discussion to Equus ferus ferus, unilaterally by Una. I have requested the move to be discussed and undone if no consensus for the original move exists. In that case, this page needs to be moved to Tarpan (disambiguation). See Talk:Equus_ferus_ferus#Requested_move -- Kim van der Linde ^{at venus} 16:11, 31 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, of course it was move unilaterally and without discussion, because User:Una Smith is attempting to change policy without having to discuss and gain community consensus for the policy change she wants to implement. Please simply report this latest at AN/I. The more people who get tired of this behaviour, the sooner the community actually starts discussing the policy change that User:Una Smith is attempting to make. She appears to want the vast majority of primary topics on Wikipedia to be dabs. This way users can come to Wikipedia and usually get redirect pages instead of articles, because, after all, readers want choices, they don't come here for information. --KP Botany (talk) 18:49, 31 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The article concerns an extinct species, for which the usual practice on Wikipedia is to use the scientific name. But of course anyone can request a page move at any time. --Una Smith (talk) 00:38, 1 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The typical usage of a scientific name for an extinct species does not generally apply when the extinction has been recorded in history (see Dodo, List of extinct mammals, etc). Sabine's Sunbird talk 00:43, 1 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Then the page name should be Eurasian wild horse, don't you think? But in this case the species is in a genus and family with many extinct taxa. I think using the scientific name is perfectly reasonable. --Una Smith (talk) 01:18, 1 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Entries on dab page[edit]

I also have not found a reliable source for the use of tarpan as a common name for the kiang, so I agree with removing kiang from the dab page. However, in searching Google Books, I found many reliable sources where "tarpan" clearly refers to Equus ferus, or to Przewalski's horse (sometimes rendered "true tarpan"). Some reliable sources refer to the two subspecies as "Russian tarpan" and "Mongolian tarpan". In short, the early literature on the systematics of Equus frequently uses "tarpan" to refer to true wild horses (ie, Equus ferus, as distinct from feral horses). --Una Smith (talk) 04:44, 1 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Cool, references? -- Kim van der Linde ^{at venus} 04:46, 1 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Added one ref so far to Przewalski's horse. I note also the suite of "plateau tarpan", "steppe tarpan", and "forest tarpan". --Una Smith (talk) 05:12, 1 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Added one other ref on Grullo. --Una Smith (talk) 04:14, 2 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

A 1906 article that says it "seems?" --KP Botany (talk) 04:52, 2 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

How many refs do you require, KP? --Una Smith (talk) 05:13, 2 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

KP, we just copy encyclopaedia Britannica of 1906 to wikipedia and are done. Nothing changed after that really..... ;-) -- Kim van der Linde ^{at venus} 13:05, 2 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, but watch out for recentism. --Una Smith (talk) 16:48, 2 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Sure! -- Kim van der Linde ^{at venus} 16:59, 2 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The Przewalski's horse is not a "Tarpan." If an encyclopedia in 1906 called it that, it is interesting trivia but not relevant to a dab page. And grullo is a color in the dun family, a dilution gene on a black base coat, less common than the dun dilution on a bay coat. It is nothing but OR to make grullo something it is not. Montanabw^(talk) 22:21, 2 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Finding and citing reliable sources is not original research, the sourced information I have added to the articles is relevant, and it is not trivia. --Una Smith (talk) 22:45, 2 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

A 1906 source is hardly a reliable one on a topic like this. I mean, shall we start using 1906 sources as the definitive voice on medical articles or physics articles? The point is that you have ONE person who had it wrong using a term that is archaic. The Przewalski is a Mongolian primitive horse, the Tarpan was a primitive European horse. They may or may not have some relationship, the scientific evidence is still not complete. But these were different animals and a 1906 source doesn't change that. It appears you are digging very deep to make a WP:POINT that backs your crusade here and at wild horse and at the Tarpan/Equus ferus ferus article. This is disruptive, fails to show respect for community input and consensus and is still trivia and a misinterpretation or resynthesis of data, which DOES constitute OR. Montanabw^(talk) 23:19, 2 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]