Talk:Domestication of the sheep

Timeline

Right now the article says both that sheep domestication happened 11000-9000 years ago and in 11000-9000 BC. I don't have access to the references cited. Anyone that has should check and fix. Thanks! Lothiack (talk) 03:43, 23 January 2016 (UTC)

Asia?

Why is there almost no mention of the history of sheep in Asia? The lead mentions sheep in the antiquity of "western Asia" (Mesopotamia and Persia), but nothing since then, though I am quite certain that sheep are part of the domestic economies of Mongolia and various East and Central Asian countries. Not sure if this article is ready for GA/FA if there's no section on the history of sheep in Asia. - Boneyard90 (talk) 16:30, 15 September 2013 (UTC)

Thank you - the article has been much improved by the addition of an 'Asia' section including the early history of domestication. For FA that section certainly needs further work along the lines indicated. Chiswick Chap (talk) 09:24, 21 September 2013 (UTC)

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Chiswick Chap (talk · contribs) 16:25, 15 September 2013 (UTC)

I'm happy to review this article, which looks interesting. Chiswick Chap (talk) 16:25, 15 September 2013 (UTC)

Review table

Rate	Attribute	Review Comment
1. Well-written:
	1a. the prose is clear, concise, and understandable to an appropriately broad audience; spelling and grammar are correct.	Prose: ok; Copyright: seems ok; Spelling: ok; Grammar: ok
	1b. it complies with the Manual of Style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation.	Lead: ok; Layout: ok; Weasel: ok; Fiction: N/A; Lists: N/A
2. Verifiable with no original research:
	2a. it contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline.	ref layout ok
	2b. reliable sources are cited inline. All content that could reasonably be challenged, except for plot summaries and that which summarizes cited content elsewhere in the article, must be cited no later than the end of the paragraph (or line if the content is not in prose).	ok
	2c. it contains no original research.	ok
3. Broad in its coverage:
	3a. it addresses the main aspects of the topic.	Yes it does. It will require some effort to bring the archaeology and early domestication up to the 'comprehensiveness' needed for FA but the main aspects of the topic are now addressed at least briefly.
	3b. it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style).	Good focus and level throughout.
	4. Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each.	Pressure group comments now quoted and cited.
	5. Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute.	Article has changed very slowly. Chiswick Chap (talk) 07:15, 16 September 2013 (UTC)
6. Illustrated, if possible, by media such as images, video, or audio:
	6a. media are tagged with their copyright statuses, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content.	all licensed on Commons
	6b. media are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions.	all ok
	7. Overall assessment.	Article has been strengthened during this GA process and it now addresses the key elements of the topic. The suggestions in the comments below will enable further progress towards comprehensiveness in the coming months.

Comments

• One preliminary comment - the unnamed section before the table of contents is not structured as a lead section, which should summarize the content of the article. Since that content is organized by continent (In Africa, In Europe, etc) I would expect something about these continental differences to be the 'meat' of the lead. Instead, the material is itself provided with inline citations and does not appear to be a summary of anything, so I suspect the lead section remains to be written, and this material is some kind of general overview. It needs a name (or perhaps be split into more than one section), and then it and the rest of the article need to be summarized in the new lead. I have provisionally suggested a name 'Overview: the domestication of sheep', which I expect you can improve upon.

•  Doing... I'm going to ask for help with this one from WP:AG, as ledes are not my strong point at all.

The lead is better but still not sufficient.

• Some paragraphs (marked) are entirely uncited.

•  Done References added

• Some citations need page numbers, for example refs 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 12, 17, 25, and 37. I haven't tried to tag all instances. Note that e.g. refs 1, 2, 3 are used many times, so it needs to be split with a page ref in each case.

•  Done I believe I've completed this, via use of Template:RP.

• The language used about animal welfare is not all appropriate - either put PETA (etc) material in quotes and cite it to page, or use normal Wikipedia language.

•  Done I've quoted the PETA comments and changed the wording, although I'm still not 100% sure it's up to snuff. I'm willing to make any further changes that might be necessary.

• • • There's still a 'horrendous brutality' in there.

•  Done changed to 'inhumanely' as that's the term the source uses.

• Just a drive by comment, since this is only about domesticated sheep, shouldn't the title reflect this? The title alone is ambiguous, and could also refer to wild sheep. FunkMonk (talk) 21:16, 15 September 2013 (UTC)
  • No, long ago the article domestic sheep was moved to sheep in accordance with WP:COMMONNAME. Steven Walling • talk 21:25, 15 September 2013 (UTC)
    • That doesn't preclude renaming to 'History of domestication of sheep' (or similar). Chiswick Chap (talk) 07:01, 16 September 2013 (UTC)
      • I would have no objection at all to moving the article to 'History of the domestic sheep' or somesuch, but I don't know if that would break the GA bot or something. --TKK! bark with me if you're my dog! 21:08, 16 September 2013 (UTC)

Yes, probably best to wait until (just) afterwards. Chiswick Chap (talk) 21:34, 16 September 2013 (UTC)

• Ref 24 is naked. Doesn't matter for GA but it looks scruffy. Chiswick Chap (talk) 07:22, 16 September 2013 (UTC)
  •  Done Put some clothes on it :) --TKK! bark with me if you're my dog! 22:14, 16 September 2013 (UTC)

• Article's breadth generally ok, but archaeology is only just mentioned. A discussion of finds at major early sites like Çatalhöyük would seem entirely appropriate for this article. A map (fertile crescent? arrows and dates on map to show progress?) might be useful to support that discussion. That could just be in the 'In Asia' section but perhaps it would make sense in the 'Overview' (not an ideal name for a section, btw).

'Wild ancestors' is a much better title. I suspect that the early Asian history/archaeology is the crux of the article (a whole new section?), and yes, a map would support it nicely.

The archaeology remains light - perhaps now sufficient for GA, but borderline. Çatalhöyük was meant as an example, not as the one-and-only instance. A map or a discussion of the geographic occurrence and spread in space and time would be an improvement; the suggestions below on sources should enable some of the loose ends to be tied up with development and spread through Asia. Both the terms 'pastoral' and 'nomadic' originally meant 'looking after flocks (of sheep)' by the way - note the interplay of settlement/civilisation (L. civis, townsman), as at Çatalhöyük, and nomadic lifestyle. Chiswick Chap (talk) 07:43, 20 September 2013 (UTC)

• On same theme, phrases like "sources provide a domestication date..." aren't ideal - let's talk about the topic, not the sources, unless to point out differing schools of thought.
  •  Done

• What (In Africa) is "an influential number"?
  •  Done

• When was the livestock protection collar invented? Chiswick Chap (talk) 07:34, 16 September 2013 (UTC)
  •  Done Was apparently invented in Texas, not South Africa. Moved tidbit and expanded appropriately.

• There is now a section on sheep in Asia, but no new material. The history of sheep in Asia stops at "Biblical figures". There's been quite a bit of time since then. Coverage seems inadequate without some summary of the history of sheep over the last 2,000 years and the current status of sheep related products in the economies of the many Asian countries. - Boneyard90 (talk) 15:02, 16 September 2013 (UTC)

I think this is an important comment that requires attention.

There seems to be little in the way of information on sheep in asia after biblical times; there might be a keyword I'm missing in my searches. Most of the information stops in the biblical time period and leaves a massive gap between then and the modern era. --TKK! bark with me if you're my dog! 23:37, 18 September 2013 (UTC)

The article Nomadic pastoralism may have relevant information and sources. I did a google search of pastoralism, pastoral society, pastoral culture, pastoral economy, and combined those with sheep and/or Asia. Sources are out there. - Boneyard90 (talk) 01:12, 19 September 2013 (UTC)

The Fat-tailed sheep of south Asia needs mentioning; I saw them in Afghanistan and they appear well adapted to the environment (hot dry summers, cold mountain winters). The links may help you find a bit more, as Boneyard90 says. You might like to read and link Eurasian nomads, Shepherd and Carpet (look at the Turkish carpets, Turkmen, Azerbaijani sections), all of which concern sheep in Asia. -- Chiswick Chap (talk) 07:49, 19 September 2013 (UTC)

Also see Agriculture in Mongolia#Animal husbandry. - Boneyard90 (talk) 13:26, 19 September 2013 (UTC)

Origins of Agriculture in Western Central Asia is a great source book. Steven Walling • talk 08:06, 20 September 2013 (UTC)

Bactria–Margiana Archaeological Complex for the Jeitun Culture of Central Asia. Chiswick Chap (talk) 08:29, 20 September 2013 (UTC)

• In the Asia section, and under the sub-section Domestication, the last sentence says, "By that span of the Bronze Age, sheep with all the major features of modern breeds were widespread throughout Western Asia." What span is that, the sentence is referring to? Is that the (entire) span of the Bronze Age or specifically just that part of the span two or three thousand years after 6000 BC i.e. The Early Bronze Age?

First animals domesticated?

The article states "Sheep are the first animals domesticated by humans" without giving any references. It was my understanding that dog domestication preceded sheep and goats by some 10,000 years. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.203.133.14 (talk) 09:59, 3 May 2015 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on History of the domestic sheep. 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/20101017025027/http://www.cormosheep.org/Cormo/Conservationx.html to http://www.cormosheep.org/Cormo/Conservationx.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: 5 June 2024).

• 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) 19:50, 30 September 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on History of the domestic sheep. 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/20080422080400/http://www.farmersguardian.com/story.asp?sectioncode=1&storycode=15751 to http://www.farmersguardian.com/story.asp?sectioncode=1&storycode=15751
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20160713133224/http://harvestpublicmedia.org/article/long-slow-decline-us-sheep-industry to http://harvestpublicmedia.org/article/long-slow-decline-us-sheep-industry
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080808072549/http://sl.farmonline.com.au/news/state/agribusiness-and-general/general/pain-relief-from-man-to-lamb/13113.aspx to http://sl.farmonline.com.au/news/state/agribusiness-and-general/general/pain-relief-from-man-to-lamb/13113.aspx

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: 5 June 2024).

• 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) 12:04, 5 November 2017 (UTC)

Move discussion in progress

There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:Origin of the domestic dog which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. —RMCD bot 11:03, 24 March 2022 (UTC)