Talk:Giant Schnauzer/Archive 1

This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Archive 1

"The Rips"

I would like to know why the information regarding "The Rips," that was apparently last present in the version of this article dated 17 August 2009, was removed. I for one, if I were an owner or a potential owner of a Giant Schnauzer, would like to know to watch out for "The Rips," so that my Giant Schnauzer may not run at full speed directly into house guests, potentially flipping them overhead. This was some of the most useful information that I think was in this article. --CrumpyTheReindeer (talk) 05:15, 25 July 2011 (UTC)

Photo and NPOV

This photo is almost definately not a Giant Schnauzer, because the dog is barely over the knees of the handler. A Giant Schnauzer would be significantly taller, therefore it is most likely a Standard Schnauzer. We should probably pull the photo and put out a request.

Also, does this article meet NPOV requirements for Wikipedia? It's mostly negative about this breed, and mentions almost nothing positive. JACooks 04:06, 1 April 2006 (UTC).

After examining some of the other dog breed articles, I would say this definately isn't a neutral point of view. Compare this page to the Siberian Husky article. That article notes all the health problems, and negative aspects of the breed, but also comments on the positives (loyal, friendly, etc.) This article focuses heavily on the exercise necessary and dominant nature, and doesn't discuss the breed's intelligence, family-orientation, and loyalty. I've owned both of these breeds, and think there are positives that are being missed in this article. I'm happy to edit this article, after a suitable period of being tagged NPOV. JACooks 13:44, 1 April 2006 (UTC)

There's nothing here that looks inaccurate to me, just perhaps incomplete, which isn't the same as being NPOV. I encourage you to add appropriate info asap; no need to wait. Elf | Talk 15:53, 1 April 2006 (UTC)

NPOV does not imply inaccurate, it implies a one-sided viewpoint. That is what needs to be corrected. The following comments were added by IPs to the article, but should have been added here. I'm in the process of making changes to address all the concern. JACooks 12:03, 11 April 2006 (UTC)

"Potential expensive vet bills" is a possibility with any large purebred dog, and for that matter any dog. Getting a Giant doesn't mean you will have serious or any health issues at all. One does need to consider that these dogs do require regualr trips to the groomer's. Also a good quality diet is essential but the should be required to maintain the health of any dog.

I have been around many Giants and never known them to "become aggressive" as they mature. This article has been apparently written by someone who either does not like Giant Schnauzers or simply did not have accurate information.

They are strong willed but with early obedience training and patience, they are one of the best large breed dogs available.

This is not a Giant Schnauzer. More accurately it is a BRT.

I've removed the NPOV tag, since I think we've made enough changes that it is no longer so one-sided. We could still use more information, and also need a verified photo

Ideally don't all dogs "single track"?

Not nessescarily. Some dogs side track. My Giant actually does walk forward a little side ways, which is actually pretty funny since he's happy go lucky. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Urufu Wolfsbane (talk • contribs) 16:48, 26 February 2010 (UTC)

Who says a Giant Schnauzer only would get 4 out of 5 stars for protection??? Is that a military/police ranking or someones opinion?? If a Giant Schnazuer only gets 4 out of 5 stars I would hate to see the dog that gets 5!! They are one of the top guards out there, even better than the overbred American German Shepherds, Pit Bulls, and Dobermans...what would be better?? Maybe some of the rare breeds like Fila Brasilero or Dogo Argentino...but I put a Giant up there with the very elite...I hate how opinions still constitute the majority of Wiki articles...(I dont have a username on here) Joe. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.3.47.60 (talk) 18:34, 25 August 2010 (UTC)

Photograph question

Over on the Help Desk, a user has asked whether this article's photo shows the right breed of dog: please see Wikipedia:Help_desk#Wrong_dog_photo for discussion. Can a knowledgeable editor respond? Gonzonoir (talk) 14:06, 3 December 2010 (UTC)

Which photo? There are two photos on the page. -- Uzma Gamal (talk) 14:48, 3 December 2010 (UTC)

It refers to the first main picture. The picture in Giant Schnauzer says "Other names Riesenschnauzer, Russian Bear Schnauzer". The article Black Russian Terrier has a picture that says "Other names Black Terrier, Tchiorny Terrier, Chornyi, Russian Bear Schnauzer, Russian Black Terrier". Are they the same breed? Are the "also known as" entries wrong? I don't know so I referred this for expert help. -- Q Chris (talk) 15:36, 3 December 2010 (UTC)

"Russian Bear Schnauzer" incorrect

In the section "other names", the name "Russian Bear Schnauzer" is incorrect, "sooty Bear Schnauzer is correct". "Rußiger" doesn't mean "russian" it means "sooty" ( Ruß = soot/grime/coom ), I'll change it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.61.89.66 (talk) 14:24, 27 June 2012 (UTC)

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Giant Schnauzer/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: FunkMonk (talk · contribs) 13:01, 27 July 2013 (UTC)

Hi, I will review this article. FunkMonk (talk) 13:01, 27 July 2013 (UTC)
It seems to have any common names, why is Riesenschnauzer specifically listed instead of any of the others?

Done I listed it because it was mentioned on the AKC page; I went back and read it and it simply says that it's the german name for the dog so I've removed it.

- - Still there as far as I can see, but you could perhaps add the next most used English common name (whatever that is) instead? FunkMonk (talk) 15:05, 27 July 2013 (UTC)

Oops, I may have accidently saved over it and re-added it. I was accidently editing in two different tabs at one point. I'm not sure there is another common English name; I keep track of them as I research (to use as search terms) and that's all I could find. --TKK! bark with me if you're my dog! 15:12, 27 July 2013 (UTC)

The last sentence in the lead seems to be hanging, could it be merged with the paragraph above?

Done Changed. I moved it to the end of the first paragraph.

The lead makes it seem certain what breeds were used as basis for this one, but the article states it is speculation.

Done Changed

The following from the lead is more detailed thna the description of the same is in the article body: "Solid black, and a color known as salt and pepper, where white, black, and gray hairs speckle the dog at random, making it look like it has been seasoned." There should be no unique info in the lead not also in the article.

Done Flip-flopped them, since that information is in the ref

The following from the lead is not mentioned specifically in the article either: "It is the largest of the three breeds of Schnauzer, with the other two breeds being the Standard Schnauzer and the Miniature Schnauzer."

Done Added to the article body

yOPU WRITE "SHOULD BE" ABOUT ALL THE PHYSICAL FEATURES, INSTEAD OF FOR EXAMPLE "THEY ARE". wOULD THE LATTER NOT BE BETTER? Whoops, wrote the former with caps lock on, but since this is not article space, I'll just leave it as is...

Done Corrected

"Some breeders believe that salt and pepper colored Giant Schnauzers are more docile than their black-furred counterparts.[5]" Does that not make more sense under temperament?

Done Moved to the temperament section

"Giant Schnauzers are usually a quiet breed.[3]" Is this in reference to barking? Because if it is about behaviour, it does not seem to be consistent with the preceding text.

Done Corrected by rearranging the paragraphs a bit

The images in the infobox and under appearance could need some description templates on Commons, they are very lacking as of now.

Done I've added the templates.

"The Giant Schnauzer should be "amiable in repose, and a commanding figure when aroused"[6]" There should not be important text in the captions that is not also in the article.

Done Fixed

"Cancer is common in dark-colored dogs" Why?

Done Added an explanation.

I think it looks pretty good now, so I've passed it. You don't really need the white space under temperament, but that's up to you. FunkMonk (talk) 15:43, 27 July 2013 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Giant Schnauzer. 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:

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) 16:53, 11 January 2017 (UTC)