Talk:Horse/Archive 9

Archive 5

←

Archive 7

Archive 8

Archive 9

Clarity re. subspecies

Could someone please edit the lead to make it clear which are the 2 extant subspecies of wild horse. The opening sentence mentions one subspecies, but it is not until later in the paragraph that Przewalski's horse is mentioned. It is not absolutely clear that these are the two extant subspecies. The article Wild horse is similarly confusing as it seems determined to discuss extinct subspecies in conjunction with extant subspecies.__DrChrissy (talk) 14:40, 29 November 2013 (UTC)

There is ONE extant subspecies of "wild" - as in never domesticated - horse. The domesticated horse is now called equus ferus caballus instead of equus caballus due to some decision in taxonimy land that I don't fully understand, but that taxonomists care about a great deal. There is a user to is an expert on taxonomy we rely upon for all of this and I am reluctant to change this material without consulting her. Montanabw^(talk) 19:33, 2 December 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for that. To be clearer, the opening paragraph could read -

"The horse (Equus ferus caballus)[2][3] is one of two extant subspecies of Equus ferus, the other being Equus ferus przewalskii. It is an odd-toed ungulate mammal belonging to the taxonomic family Equidae. The horse has evolved over the past 45 to 55 million years from a small multi-toed creature into the large, single-toed animal of today. Humans began to domesticate horses around 4000 BC, and their domestication is believed to have been widespread by 3000 BC. Horses in the subspecies caballus are domesticated, although some domesticated populations live in the wild as feral horses. These feral populations are not true wild horses, as this term is used to describe horses that have never been domesticated, such as the endangered Przewalski's horse, the only remaining true wild horse. There is an extensive, specialized vocabulary used to describe equine-related concepts, covering everything from anatomy to life stages, size, colors, markings, breeds, locomotion, and behavior." __DrChrissy (talk) 21:39, 2 December 2013 (UTC)

I added underlining to show what you want to add. I think that would be OK, but let's have it sit a day or two to see if anyone else has an opinion. Anyone else out there with thoughts or comments? We may remake the lede later if we bring the article to FAC, but that's not going to happen until there is a wikicup at stake, so for now, I don't see a problem. Montanabw^(talk) 04:51, 3 December 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for making the change clearer. If this change is correct, it (or something similar) does need to be made as the article lead at the moment is confusing to the lay reader. Happy to sit and listen to other comments__DrChrissy (talk) 17:02, 3 December 2013 (UTC)

The unique endurance of horses in the mammal kingdom?

The article Persistence hunting mentions that horses and humans are the only animals known to use sweating effectively for thermo-regulation and boost endurance through that. I think this article could use a section which explains this aspect. --74.78.235.87 (talk) 02:51, 8 January 2014 (UTC)

Interesting. Can you help us find some source material to verify that? Montanabw^(talk) 22:55, 8 January 2014 (UTC)

Domestication

Domestication of horses may actually have begun in Arabia 9000 years ago. An artifact currently being circulated at museums in the United States by Saudi Arabia -- a one-third life size stone head and fore body -- clearly shows evidence of a bit and reins. The object was archaeologically dated to 7000 BC. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2602:306:32C5:F0D0:B838:5BDF:9CE5:4E7F (talk) 05:27, 12 January 2014 (UTC)

That has been discussed (and dismissed for now) at the domestication article. It's an extraordinary claim and lacks extraordinary - or even peer0 reviewed - evidence. What they have is a horse with a line on its shoulder that someone thinks might be tack. It is not "bit and reins". It could also be the ridge of the scapula. Montanabw^(talk) 00:53, 13 January 2014 (UTC)

Taxonomical synonyms

The list of taxonomical synonyms I added has been cancelled. Now the pages shows only the number of synonyms (48). Do you think it was completely unuseful?--Carnby (talk) 19:39, 4 March 2014 (UTC)

Yes, because most of them are either obsolete or inaccurate. Montanabw^(talk) 07:06, 6 March 2014 (UTC)

horses originated from india

source

http://hub.jhu.edu/2014/11/20/india-fossils-perissodactyla

http://www.nbcnews.com/science/weird-science/what-horses-rhinos-have-common-ancestor-india-n253026

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/home/science/Horses-and-rhinos-originated-in-India-Researchers/articleshow/45218292.cms

Interesting, but Perissodactyla is not the horse, it is the larger grouping that includes rhinos and tapirs. Also, this is not necessarily a direct ancestor, per the NBC article. Maybe post at the Perissodactyla article. Montanabw^(talk) 06:40, 24 November 2014 (UTC)

Also also

In the intelligence subsection, there is a line:

"Horses excel at simple learning, but are also able to use more advanced cognitive abilities that involve categorization and concept learning."

I'd fix it myself, but the article is locked. It should say "but are also able..." — Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.236.116.200 (talk) 10:59, 20 March 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for catching that, I'll fix it. Montanabw^(talk) 19:31, 20 March 2014 (UTC)

I'm not entirely sure what "simple learning" and "excel" are supposed to mean in these circumstances. Simple learning often refers to behaviours such as habituation, which is shown by animals as non-complex as sea anenomes. "Excel" suggests a comparison is being made - but a comparison with what. I would take it as a given that horses show simple learning and simply state "Horses are able to use more advanced cognitive abilities that involve, for example, categorization and concept learning.__DrChrissy (talk) 10:57, 20 March 2015 (UTC)

We could add some wikilinks to appropriate articles; I think the phrasing mirrors the source. Montanabw^(talk) 05:31, 21 March 2015 (UTC)

Taxonomy and evolution

Most articles about animals have "Taxonomy and evolution" near the top of the page. I think that section here on "Horse" should be moved too. Could the editors who monitor this page think about this? Rissa, Guild of Copy Editors (talk) 23:16, 26 March 2015 (UTC)

Recent deletes and reverts

Montanabw, I know you have put a lot of work into this article and therefore it is natural that you feel defensive when others point out small defects. The same does not apply to DrChrissy, though, whose revert was mere impulse.

Any secondary school pupil can see that you can't tag the section in quention to the precending paragraph:

"These feral populations are not true wild horses, as this term is used to describe horses that have never been domesticated, such as the endangered Przewalski's horse, a separate subspecies, and the only remaining true wild horse. There is an extensive, specialized vocabulary used to describe equine-related concepts, covering everything from anatomy to life stages, size, colors, markings, breeds, locomotion, and behavior."

It has nothing to do with the preceding information and surely for a article rated "GA" you would agree that it needs improving.

Secondly, it is not a major change by any definition and I am sorry to see an experienced editor grasp at straws to find a justification rather than actually take a minute to look at the issue. If it was a major change, the information itself would have enjoyed more prominence, not a for-lack-of-knowing-what-else-to-do-with-it decision to add it to a paragraph about something entirely different.

Thirdly, pointing me to WP:GA is os of zero help, so if it meant to be informative and instructive, then direct users to more dedicated content.

Fourthly, yes, of course the lede must be a mini version/ reflection of the article, but that is not to say that it must address every single aspect of the article. That would be untenable and at a glance anyone can see that there are plenty of parts of the article that are not foreshadowed in the lede. For your information, I tracked down the origin of that bit, which goes back to 2008 — in its more-or-less-present form. At that time it was the beginning of a new section and has over time been eroded. To now shove it up into the previous section ecause it is too little to merit standind on its own is shoddy work and needs to be addressed.

But anyway, I've 'seen' you around a lot and do know that you are one of the 'good' guys. Regards, and have a great Sunday. Rui ''Gabriel'' Correia (talk) 11:56, 12 July 2015 (UTC)

I'd like to express my agreement with Rui Gabriel Correia on all points. The material on the "extensive, specialized vocabulary" has little to do with the sentences that precede it, so it is an abrupt change and therefore not good writing. I also agree that not everything that is mentioned in an article needs to be in the lead. Finally, I think every field has specialized vocabulary, and a discussion of that vocabulary is the kind of detailed information that belongs only in the main part of the article. CorinneSD (talk) 15:20, 12 July 2015 (UTC)

I agree. It's interesting, but it needs to go somewhere else. Rothorpe (talk) 16:43, 12 July 2015 (UTC)

most recent?

This sentence is not correctly worded to convey the intent...

"The most recent, but most irrefutable evidence of domestication comes from sites where horse remains were interred with chariots in graves of the Sintashta and Petrovka cultures c. 2100 BC."

The most recent irrefutable evidence of domestication would be any horse performing a task today like pulling a handy cab in NYC. That would be irrefutable evidence of domestication that is much more recent that something 4000 years ago.

I think the writer really means "...the oldest, irrefutable evidence of domestication..."

--23.119.204.117 (talk) 23:48, 28 August 2015 (UTC)

No, they aren't the oldest - while I agree phrasing could be improved, the chariot burials are the most recent in time; good evidence of domestication goes back another 1500 years (skeletal remains with signs of bit wear, etc), but the chariot burials are the "drop dead" proof that is as irrefutable as anything gets in archaeology. Do you have ideas for how we can phrase things clearer? Montanabw^(talk) 23:08, 29 August 2015 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Horse. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20080218130631/http://www.nps.gov:80/uspp/fhorsepage.htm to http://www.nps.gov/uspp/fhorsepage.htm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

Y An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 02:56, 1 January 2016 (UTC)

Basuto Pony/Horse

Is it true that the Basuto Pony/Horse was in a war?? because if its not true then I wil go CRAZY!!!!. So tell me what yo know and tell me if it's true... OOOK!!! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 45.59.89.68 (talk) 18:18, 12 July 2015 (UTC)

It is definitely true -- during the reign of Thylacinus IV, war broke out between between the Dagobar and Ngame Nebula systems. Basuto Pony was instrumental defeating the combined forces of Tektronix, Purdue and ihnp4.

Basketball is my favorite sport, I like it how they dribble up and down the court! I keep it so fresh on the microphone I like no interruptions when the game is on! I like slay dunks, they take me to the roof, my favorite shot is the ally-oop!:) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 204.235.47.43 (talk) 00:29, 24 February 2016 (UTC)

Horse and pony show

The smaller equine in this picture is clearly a pony, the conformation (barrel body, shorter head, etc.) show this - the picture is even called "Horse-and-pony".

I propose to change the caption to reflect this.

All the best: Rich Farmbrough, 21:23, 12 January 2016 (UTC).

Miniature horses are called "horses," not ponies, and those who care happen to care a lot. (I've judged minis, and you do NOT want to call them "ponies"... trust me on this one!) I know, it's a weird horse person thing. Truth is, there is no real DNA difference, they are just different breeds, not species. Also, the definition of pony varies -- even when the phenotype fits (and I'm not disagreeing with you that the little booger has a pony phenotype), the "legal" pony size varies depending on whose rules you use. (Fjords and Icelandics look very pony like but are called horses too...) As for the photo title, if I had a dime for every photo of a gray horse in commons that the uploader mislabeled as a "white horse", I'd be rich and wouldn't be going out to buy my powerball ticket tonight! Montanabw^(talk) 22:41, 13 January 2016 (UTC)

I can see no actual rationale for it being a "miniature horse" in your comment, except an appeal to authority. I do, of course, know that the definitions of both vary, and do not dispute that this might get get into all sorts of equine contests, depending on their rules. However since we do want to draw a distinction between miniature horses and ponies, and this clearly fits the latter category better than the former, I am changing the caption. All the best: Rich Farmbrough, 22:49, 31 March 2016 (UTC).

It's not worth a big deal, my own view is that it's a mini, not a shetland, but it does fall in a gray area, so I really am not going to go to the mat on the question. Absent someone who can make a calculation of whether the little booger is under the cutoff for a mini, I suppose we really can't say for sure. Montanabw^(talk) 06:26, 1 April 2016 (UTC)

synonyms in infobox

Under synonyms in the infobox, it says at least 48 published. It would be nice if there was an explanation for what that meant, the reference [2] is not enough. NikolaiHo 20:22, 8 May 2016 (UTC)

Horse DNA Sequence year

The article references 2007 as the year Horse DNA was first sequenced, but the linked article says 2006 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2607:FB90:809B:FE4B:BC09:EA5A:9DA5:4067 (talk) 07:36, 26 September 2016 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 28 November 2016

118.210.212.138 (talk) 04:12, 28 November 2016 (UTC)

did you know a horse or ponies young is called a foal

Foal is mentioned 13 times in the article, including "a young horse, called a foal" in the second paragraph - Arjayay (talk) 08:47, 28 November 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Horse. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080705105054/http://www.waho.org/Purityissue.html to http://www.waho.org/History.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140201154621/http://www.britishhorseracing.com/goracing/racing/racehorses/history.asp to http://www.britishhorseracing.com/goracing/racing/racehorses/history.asp
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130508135709/http://www.fei.org/disciplines/dressage/about-para-equestrian-dressage to http://www.fei.org/disciplines/dressage/about-para-equestrian-dressage
• Added {{dead link}} tag to http://ohioline.osu.edu/b762/b762_12.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 03:24, 5 April 2017 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 2 June 2017

In last sentence of the first paragraph:

covering everything from anatomy to life stages, size, colors, markings, breeds, locomotion, and behavior.

The link to anatomy refers to [[anatomy]]. I suggest linking it to anatomy so [[equine anatomy|anatomy]].

Similar for locomotion refers to [[animal locomotion|locomotion]]. I suggest changing it to locomotion so [[horse gait|locomotion]] The new text (with changes) would be covering everything from [[equine anatomy|anatomy]] to life stages, size, [[equine coat color|colors]], [[horse markings|markings]], [[horse breed|breeds]], [[horse gait|locomotion]], and behavior. . Seán D. Middleton (talk) 16:23, 2 June 2017 (UTC)

Done: Minor edit only, and appropriate. —KuyaBriBri^Talk 17:41, 2 June 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Horse. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070927193341/http://equisearch.com/horses_care/health/behavior/eqzzz629/ to http://equisearch.com/horses_care/health/behavior/eqzzz629/
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070510051620/http://equisearch.com/horses_care/health/behavior/sleepdisorder_121506/ to http://equisearch.com/horses_care/health/behavior/sleepdisorder_121506/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 13:51, 2 August 2017 (UTC)

Paragraph 2 needs work

Hi folks,

I’m new to the Wikipedia community, and I’m no expert when it comes to horses. It’s probably best that I can’t edit the article. However, somebody with writing chops should grab a red pen and get to work. Here’s a quick critique — hopefully someone more familiar with the subject matter will take them into consideration and revise appropriately. (Or let me know if I should take a crack at it... this is my first “talk,” I’m not quite sure if criticism without contribution is welcome).

Brief comments on p2: It’s a list of popular trivia. However, it begins with what appears to be a classic Topic Sentence — the topic being horse anatomy. The following sentence walks from anatomy to instincts. Then procreation, and then domesticated youth development, and finally lifespan. I can see where the contributors may have sought to tell the “story” of horses, but I believe it’s disorganized and disconnected from p1 and p3. Perhaps most problematic is that the article’s actual anatomy section just links out to other Equine articles.

Suggestions:

1 (easiest but not best): Add a topic sentence that prepares the reader for a litany of trivia.

2 (half and half): Suggestion 1 plus move below p3.

3 (major edit and my preference): Since the “anatomy” section has no substance anyway, replace the entirety of p2 with the content from the anatomy section, find a better home for the other trivia currently stuff into the p2 grab bag, and remove the anatomy section (since its contents would now be in the main article).

Thank you for your consideration and contributions.

-Mark

...here’s the current text of p2:

—

Horses' anatomy enables them to make use of speed to escape predators and they have a well-developed sense of balance and a strong fight-or-flight response. Related to this need to flee from predators in the wild is an unusual trait: horses are able to sleep both standing up and lying down. Female horses, called mares, carry their young for approximately 11 months, and a young horse, called a foal, can stand and run shortly following birth. Most domesticated horses begin training under saddle or in harness between the ages of two and four. They reach full adult development by age five, and have an average lifespan of between 25 and 30 years.

markinstead (talk) 06:28, 31 October 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Horse. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110811110201/http://aerc.org/HorseAge.aspx to http://www.aerc.org/HorseAge.aspx
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120911122158/http://www.fei.org/sites/default/files/Annex%20XVII%20-%20Extracts%20Ponies.pdf to http://www.fei.org/sites/default/files/Annex%20XVII%20-%20Extracts%20Ponies.pdf

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 21:13, 6 November 2017 (UTC)

horse can go a long way for the same hay they eat .How long the days are 19 or 33 days — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.161.114.105 (talk) 22:47, 14 November 2017 (UTC)

Horse population.

4 Interactions with humans. 2008 total horse population 59m. 33m N&S America, 14m Asia, 6m Europe, 6m (balance) Africa & Oceania.

4.2 Work. 100m working horses only. Africa population 27m. AnnaComnemna (talk) 14:44, 4 October 2018 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 15 February 2019

Hello people, I am not trying to delete/aka fake edit this source. I love horses, i have been around horses all my life and I would love to share more information about horses, if you understand. I've had wonderful horses, during my life. Do you? NewPersonHelper (talk) 12:05, 15 February 2019 (UTC)

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. DannyS712 (talk) 14:57, 15 February 2019 (UTC)

Horses perspire like humans but this is not mentioned in the article anywhere

Horses perspire like humans but this is not mentioned in the article anywhere. I don't know if any of the sources I found from a quick google search would be considered reliable though. They are all .com sites. If anyone else wants to add a section on this they should as it's a well known fact but it's not in the article at least from what I can tell as I did ctrl+f and typed sweat and perspiration and nothing came up. Xanikk999 (talk) 00:53, 13 January 2019 (UTC)

I agree, that should be mentioned Booger-mike (talk) 01:04, 31 March 2019 (UTC)

All creatures get rid of heat, either by sweating or by panting. You probably have a point. This is a GA-class article, so sources must be high-quality (.edu often better than .com, but some .com sources can be reliable). If you have a proposed link for a source, post it here and we can look at it. Montanabw^(talk) 18:05, 2 April 2019 (UTC)

Domestication subspeciation?

Why do domestic varients have to be a subspecies? Why can't horses just be horses, and donkeys just be donkeys? I thought you couldn't be two things? Chicken: I'm a chicken, and a red junglefowl I know those are the same species, but subspecies in general are confusing Booger-mike (talk) 01:06, 31 March 2019 (UTC)

Not within the scope of our project, we just report the scientific consensus. Ask the folks who do taxonomic classification. In the case of the horse, equus ferus no longer is extant. Montanabw^(talk) 18:03, 2 April 2019 (UTC)

"No longer extant" Excuse me? A subspecies cannot exist without its origin species, so that in itself is wrong. Booger-mike (talk) 18:56, 24 April 2019 (UTC)

Domestic horse

Shouldn't the subspecies be called the "domestic horse"? Just to differentiate it from other species in the equidae family Booger-mike (talk) 18:57, 24 April 2019 (UTC)

"Not true wild horses"

Excuse me? They're in the same species, so yes they are. That's like saying Homo sapiens sapiens aren't true Homo sapiens Booger-mike (talk) 18:59, 24 April 2019 (UTC)

Hi

I'm new on wikipedia Tqolqcbz (talk) 13:19, 30 April 2019 (UTC)

How many legs does a horse have

According to Google horses have six legs. Search for "how many legs does a horse have" and the top result is:

six legs

All horses have even number of legs. All horses have two legs at the back. They also have fore legs at the front. That makes it a total of six legs.

Wikipedia:How many legs does a horse have? - Wikipedia https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:How_many_legs_does_a_horse_have%3F

Someone Not Awful (talk) 22:51, 3 May 2019 (UTC)

I think Google is messed up Booger-mike (talk) 15:26, 29 July 2019 (UTC)

According to a NatGeo article, Przewalski horses are also feral.

https://www.nationalgeographic.com/news/2018/02/przewalski-wild-horses-botai-kazakhstan-spd/

https://news.ku.edu/2018/02/16/surprising-new-study-redraws-family-tree-domesticated-and-wild-horses

They did some genetic testing, and it turns out these horses have domestic ancestors. Maybe time to change what this wiki states? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 50.99.26.113 (talk) 08:20, 30 January 2020 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 22 February 2020

Under picture of the horses eye add X: A horses eyelashes are called Brills. Tessaconti (talk) 23:45, 22 February 2020 (UTC)

​I was not able to verify that information. Could you point to sources? – Thjarkur (talk) 00:29, 23 February 2020 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 18 March 2020

Please could you add in origin that horses aren’t actually designed to be ridden? GreenTurtle17 (talk) 10:54, 18 March 2020 (UTC)

 Not done. It's not clear what changes you want to make (or what "designed" means in this context). –Deacon Vorbis (carbon • videos) 13:01, 18 March 2020 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 5 J

I have more info about them — Preceding unsigned comment added by Laftytafty (talk • contribs) 21:55, 5 June 2020 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 8 February 2021

I wanna describe the sounds of horses *starts sobbing* (talk) 14:48, 8 February 2021 (UTC)

To editor *starts sobbing*:  Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. DigitalChutney (talk) 14:58, 8 February 2021 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 10 February 2021

Horses are the main enemy of dogs 128.92.27.66 (talk) 18:55, 10 February 2021 (UTC)

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. ‑‑ElHef (Meep?) 20:16, 10 February 2021 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 18 May 2021

Under the Taxonomy section at the top, an image appears with a description. The descripti (Its a fat deformed unicorn) on describes the image in terms of "left-to-right", however it should actually be "top-to-bottom" (or perhaps "bottom to top") depending on perspective. 2601:C6:C600:59B0:9569:AD00:C232:215F (talk) 00:34, 18 May 2021 (UTC)

FYI

 – First image under Horse#Taxonomy and evolution

Unicorns evolved into horses at around 5060 B.C.

It's a bit of a confusing one, but I do know what the original caption is saying. Maybe a reword? ◢  Ganbaruby!  (talk) 06:41, 18 May 2021 (UTC)

 Partly done: The caption was describing the three images that are shown, but I have edited it to hopefully be more clear. Seemplez 11:27, 18 May 2021 (UTC)

Why does the article does not state that foals have Eponychia/Deciduous hoof capsules

Why does the article does not state that foals have Eponychia/Deciduous hoof capsules? I am asking because I just learned about it and it's presented as some kind of freakish fact nobody knows. There is a tiny article describing it broadly for all hoofed animals https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deciduous_hoof_capsule but I am wondering why this is not included into the general articles for horses for example. Is there a reason or did nobody think about it? Donald T. created a drink, and the main ingredient is horse meat.

No reason other than keeping this article as an overview and not a book. If it's a broad trait applicable to all hooved animals, then those are the articles where it belongs. Or maybe in Reproductive system of the horse. Montanabw^(talk) 16:19, 16 June 2021 (UTC)

New article about the evolution of the modern horse

Has this article been considered? 173.88.246.138 (talk) 00:59, 22 October 2021 (UTC)

It’s brand new, but we probably will add something either here or at domestication of the horse. We want to let it settle for a couple of weeks and wait for some of the peer reviewed literature to come out. But it isn’t all that surprising, as domestication has already been traced to that region. It’s the DNA changes that appear to be the new thing. It’s a cool discovery. Montanabw^(talk) 23:23, 22 October 2021 (UTC)

I added it to the article before noticing this talk page entry. Please copyedit, replace or remove (for a later revised update) it as needed. Thanks for discussing it on the talk page/s. I featured the paper in 2021 in science and also uploaded images from the study here. --Prototyperspective (talk) 21:47, 22 November 2021 (UTC)

Parasites and diseases

@Montanabw: Even where there is a separate article there needs to be a summary here. Additionally that is not the appropriate article because that is specific to care of recreational and working horses only. Both subjects are completely absent from this article. Invasive Spices (talk) 25 November 2021 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 25 December 2021

change "Horse breeds are loosely divided into three categories based on general temperament There are spirited "hot bloods,” which are know for their speed and endurance." to "Horse breeds are loosely divided into three categories based on general temperament. There are spirited "hot bloods,” which are known for their speed and endurance." BrianLambert (talk) 05:07, 25 December 2021 (UTC)

 Done ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 14:29, 25 December 2021 (UTC)

One-toed or five-toed or odd-toed or even-toed?

I'd always thought horses have five vestigial toes, four of which are fused into a hoof (two on each side of the posterior crease), and one up above. I googled only one article on the topic. If anyone has further evidence re the number of toes, the lede's "one-toed" verbiage should be reconsidered accordingly. As it stands, "one-toed" links to Odd-toed ungulate, which gives a perplexing "even one (horses, third toe)" count of horses' toes. Perhaps it should be linked to even-toed ungulate? Beats me. --Kent Dominic·(talk) 18:29, 3 February 2022 (UTC)

Kent Dominic, it is odd-toed, one being an odd number, in the Perissodactyla; a cow on the other hand is even-toed – its hoof consists of two separate claws. Is this not clear from the page? – if not, it should be fixed. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 21:08, 3 February 2022 (UTC)

@Justlettersandnumbers: It's clear that this article purports horses as one-toed, but I'm questioning whether that's scientifically attested nowadays. I don't know whether the scientific community at large still deems modern horses to be an odd-toed ungulate having five vestigial toes but one functional toe as a hoof, or as an even-toed ungulate with four weight-bearing toes fused into two separate claws (i.e., with a posterior cleave unlike a cow's anterior cleaves) together with a fifth, non-weight-bearing, vestigial toe covered by a fetlock above the hoof (as I was taught as a schoolkid with photos like this and these). Neither this article nor the odd-toed ungulate article gets into such specifics in a way that conclusively resolves the matter per old school or new school theories. If there's no consensus in the scientific community about how to construe the number of modern horses' toes, I'd hasten some editor with adequate horse competency to edit this article in a way that points to whatever controversy there may be. --Kent Dominic·(talk) 04:23, 5 February 2022 (UTC)

Poaching with horses

Hello @Naftali Honig: It appears I talked about this on your talk page but I don't remember doing so. In any case could you debate it on this talk page? I agree with what I said on your talk page and Justlettersandnumbers's edit summary: This is not uninteresting material but it largely belongs elsewhere. We are lacking in any text about horses being used to commit crimes however. If you could talk more briefly here about crime on horse back and Poaching in Africa else where I would support that. Invasive Spices (talk) 5 March 2022 (UTC)

Images

Hello @Montanabw: These [1][2] are strange removals. This [3] is a cultural image in the cultural section and [4] is an antomical image in the anatomy section and would obviously not be as suited to the domestication article. Invasive Spices (talk) 7 October 2022 (UTC)

The article is a GA class article and the images that were added over time were not relevant to the article content. One is nice art but doesn't really fit the article's context, plus once we start creating galleries of horse art, god, there are thousands of images on WP. The anatomy image has been deleted multiple times as it is an interesting historic image but not any kind of modern anatomical study. We are always open to images being posted here for discussion, though. Montanabw^(talk) 22:51, 7 October 2022 (UTC)

Domesticated??

A "horse" is not necessarily domesticated.2A02:8108:9640:1A68:4DF8:A0AF:4F2D:BE71 (talk) 13:14, 28 September 2022 (UTC)

You might be mixing up domestication and taming. Perplexedhellenic (talk) 10:40, 13 March 2023 (UTC)

Is this why the article was locked? User:Anon — Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.219.43.51 (talk) 11:02, 16 March 2023 (UTC)

Semiprotection since 2009 ... is there an imminent threat

Fourteen years' semi-protection seems a bit excessive. Is there still an imminent threat of some sort?

cc Horologium (talk · contribs) who protected it way back then

(Asking after I saw this amusing tweet and then actually looked up the log.) - David Gerard (talk) 00:04, 17 March 2023 (UTC)

I'm unprotecting and will keep an eye to see how it goes - David Gerard (talk) 00:57, 18 March 2023 (UTC)

I'll lend an eye :P - FlightTime (open channel) 01:12, 18 March 2023 (UTC)

so far, still best of all the animals - David Gerard (talk) 15:40, 18 March 2023 (UTC)

sigh oh well, it was worth a try! - David Gerard (talk) 21:29, 20 March 2023 (UTC)

And a very good try it was :P, Thanx. - FlightTime (open channel) 21:33, 20 March 2023 (UTC)

Horse breeds

There are over 700 horse breeds and the five most common are the Quarter Horse, Arabian (Also known as the Arab), Appaloosa, Thoroughbred, Morgan and Pony. The rarest are Shire, Marwari, Eriskay Pony, Caspian, and Hackney Pony.65.35.78.6 (talk) 01:46, 9 April 2023 (UTC)

Equus caballus

Why is it set up so that this page redirects from “Equus caballus,” a proper and general species name according to the ICZN, to “Equus ferus caballus,” a more obscure and disputed form?

The references provided are not persuasive. One of them does not even mention Equus. Here is an alternative reference:

https://www.iczn.org/outreach/guidelines-for-authors-and-editors/whats-in-a-name/ Greenineugene (talk) 00:11, 5 February 2023 (UTC)

I believe the article is misleading (per most recent leading sources) in giving the scientific name as Equus ferus caballus, and should instead use Equus caballus citing (e.g.) Groves & Grubb (2011), ITIS (current i.e. 2023 version) and the ASM Mammal Diversity Database (current version). Equus ferus caballus can be mentioned as an alternative, less commonly used form for those who believe that caballus is a subspecies of ferus, a concept not supported in current authoritative literature.

MSW 3 (2005) represents an earlier view in which ferus, caballus and przewalskii were considered distinct only at subspecies level, under a larger species concept which they at the time called caballus, although later this was recognised as an error and the correct name for the more inclusive taxon should have been given as ferus as per ICZN, 2003. However, more modern works treat both ferus and caballus as separate species, while recognising przewalskii either as a full species or as a subspecies of ferus. If there are no dissenting or alternative views offered here over the next few days, I will make relevant alterations to the text. Tony 1212 (talk) 06:24, 3 May 2023 (UTC)

The article should present the various possible names in a balanced way, not make an editorial choice between them; the same applies to the status of Przewalski's Horse, which seems to be unresolved. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 09:41, 4 May 2023 (UTC)

Agreed. The article should state that on balance, most authoritative sources (e.g. the 3 mentioned above, excepting MSW 3) use caballus at species level, as do the majority of recent scientific papers (Google scholar queries May 2023: "about 18,000 results" for "Equus caballus" on Google Scholar, date range 2010-2023), cf. 3,120 hits for "Equus ferus caballus", however the trinomial name is available for use by those who support the view that caballus is a subspecies of ferus. Regarding przewalskii, "Equus przewalskii" has 1,860 hits in Google Scholar, 2010-current, and "Equus ferus przewalskii" has 1,540, so the situation is more evenly split. In that respect, Groves & Grubb, 2011 and ITIS (current) use "Equus przewalskii", while ASM (American Society of Mammologists) and the IUCN Red List prefers przewalskii to be treated as a subspecies of ferus. We can cover all this satisfactorily, I am sure :) Tony 1212 (talk) 05:42, 5 May 2023 (UTC)a

This issue was beaten to death about a decade ago, and the consensus at that time was to use the trinomial name. While, consensus can change, I think it is best we stick with the trinomial forms because they are of greater precision and It is my understanding that the taxonomy world prefers this – Google scholar hits aren’t really useful here as the search cannot be constrained to taxonomy discussions and thus it’s mostly a popularity contest. Montanabw^(talk) 01:33, 6 May 2023 (UTC)

Horses originated in India?!

See History of the horse in mongolia[5] Doug Weller talk 19:11, 14 May 2023 (UTC)

No, a predecessor. Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 03:37, 15 May 2023 (UTC)

@Joshua Jonathan Not sure what you mean. Doug Weller talk 07:38, 15 May 2023 (UTC)

Odd toed ungulate may have originated in India. But those creatures were not horses. Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 07:48, 15 May 2023 (UTC)

Yes. Anyway, I've reverted the fringe nonsense. Doug Weller talk 07:51, 15 May 2023 (UTC)