Talk:Merino

From WikiProjectMed
Jump to navigation Jump to search

History additions

Added Australian History, the old section marked history is not 100% but will wait to see what happens before altering (somewone else might fix it). Article needs more USA history and South Africa History to balance. Need some decent photoes of Merinos and shearing of same, before article can move forward; will organise. Charles Esson 10:34, 16 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Editing notes

Vermont Merino

Australian Sheep and Wool Handbook has William Jarvis importing about 15000 sheep. Sheep production and management had William Jarvis importing at least 3500. I went for the US ref.

History section of the article reads: They were first brought over to Maine from Portugal in 1810 illegaly by Capt. Ephraim Sturdivant.

First off it would only have been illegal from England point of view. As Sturdivant was born in the US one has to assume he was a US citizen and thus it was not illegal. War is like that.

Second, so the captian took part in the "Merino Craze" and imported some sheep to Maine, important for Sturdivant perhaps, is it worth a mention in history of the breed.

In short a little from the beginning could go at the start of Australian history, most of the rest is covered with dates in the Australian History section anyway.

If I merge like that what is missing is a what happened to the vermont breed between 1812 and 1866 something went horrible wrong, and what is the Delaine, it doesn't get a mention in the Australian History. There is also a South African history that is important.

Charles Esson 13:26, 16 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Merged "History of Australia" and "History" as the latter added little. Article is now too biased towards Australia, I need south africa and US refs to fix that up. The refs I have pretty much sum it up, the Australian sheep book is about 80% merino, the US sheep book at about 2%. Charles Esson 23:24, 16 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Historical Magazine: And Notes and Queries Concerning the Antiquities, History, and Biography of... http://books.google.com.au/books?vid=LCCN05005123&id=eunhyYrr8YAC&pg=PA26&lpg=PA26&dq=merino+sheep&as_brr=1 First to import to USA Humphreys or Livingston. Seems to be some dispute. 61.9.139.165 11:31, 17 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Cottle definitly says the dutch gov got their sheep in 1790; 1780s in South Africa states they arrived in South Africa in 1789 this will have to be sorted out. I will have to find a second ref 61.9.139.165 10:02, 27 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

In the History section, is it Germany's or Germans' in this paragraph?:
The Napoleonic wars (1793-1813) almost destroyed the Spanish Merino industry. The old cavanas where dispersed or slaughtered. From 1810 onwards the Merino scene shifted to Germany, the United States and Australia. Between 1810 and 1840 Australia was engaged in a wool trade war with Germany while importing German Sheep. By 1840 Australia had won the war mainly because of German's preoccupation with fineness.

I'm guessing Germany's and I will be bold 09:18, 29 September 2006 (UTC)

Thanks, I would have never picked it up; your right it should have been Germany's Charles Esson 16:23, 29 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]


Facing up to reality

You can't write an honest history of the breed unless you face up to reality. The merino breed is where it is today because it has been developed for economic returns not as one would develop a breed for dog shows. Paragraph added at start to try and explain this and then edits added as I find references for the introduction genetic material. Charles Esson 00:38, 30 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Animal welfare

In tidying this I have been reflecting. The net result of the PETA campain is probable going to be the end of some genetic lines; I suppiose thats fair man created them, man can destoy them. As a humun what would be your choice if the options were circumcision of your son or the end of your genetic line. Charles Esson 12:08, 6 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

merge from Booroola Merino

I think we should merge the article Booroola Merino into this article. Alan.ca 08:58, 21 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It depends on how the users use the system. As it is you can now find an entry on the Booroola merino if you want to find out what it is; if you merge you can't. Further I think an article on the merino would be several thousand words longer before you would bother mentioning the Booroola. It really isn't that important. It really is a bit of a stub, I thought I it was more complete. Charles Esson 03:11, 28 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The article was more complete, reverted Booroola merino to version before vandalism.

Well if there is going to be mention of more than one strain of merino then by all means bring Booroola into a section under /*Strains*/ or /*Bloodlines*/. It's what my dad used to run...
If Booroola Merino was merged then turned into a redirect people would end up at this article.
From the article the only notable issue is, it was involved in the NZ genome project.Garrie 00:05, 12 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

removing irrelevant links

This article is about merino, not other animals.Bob98133 (talk) 21:49, 29 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I think you are correct. This article is about the Merino breed of sheep. The See also section is to understand about aspects of the breed. One aspect is that the Merinos are guarded by other types of livestock like donkeys and llamas. If you would like to discuss this further or if you feel that there is an impass, I would be more than willing to discuss or debate this with a third party involved. --BlindEagletalk~contribs 18:59, 3 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
OK, I see. I didn't know that. But anyhow, that information should be included in the article somewhere, along with the wiki-links, because the See Also section isn't really the right place for it.Bob98133 (talk) 21:52, 3 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Where would you suggest? I'm willing to write a brief blurb about livestock guardians and include it in this article. --BlindEagletalk~contribs 20:17, 4 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

There is plenty of information about livestock guardians in the main sheep article, which this article links to. There is no significant difference in using guardians with the merino breeds, so a blurb here isn't necessary. Remember that it's important to stay strictly on topic. This means that general info about sheep, such as predator prevention, should go in the general sheep article. Only merino-specific facts should go in the merino article. The See also section should be kept to a minimum. Linking terms , such as wool, that are linked in the article already is redundant. VanTucky 22:12, 4 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This is the guideline I'm folloowing: WP:ALSO. Am I missing something? Are you the owner of this article? The See Also section is a matter of editorial judgement. --BlindEagletalk~contribs 13:12, 5 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
As an occasional editor of this article, I am against the inclusion of a link to Guard Llamas in this article for previously stated reasons. Bob98133 (talk) 13:45, 5 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
It was originally removed without consensus. --BlindEagletalk~contribs 19:36, 5 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
BlindEagle, please AGF and stop throwing around accusations such as attempts are ownership. You are the only one in the discussion who wants to include the link to Guard llamas and the like. WP:V clearly states that you have to prove why content should be included, it's not a default to keeping it when multiple editors have removed it. Multiple users have removed the links, and you keep reinserting them. That's not a consensus. VanTucky 00:22, 6 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
A quick Google search on 'merino livestock guardian llama' returns 2,840 hits. That's not a small number. This is obviously used in the Merino sheep industry. --BlindEagletalk~contribs 13:35, 6 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
VanTucky, I must diagree with your personal attack regarding your last edit summary. I can understand if you are not for including certain content within the article and I am all for debate and discussion regarding this. However, according to your edit summary, consensus is against me and you appear to be the one instigating it. Why are you against me? --BlindEagletalk~contribs 14:22, 6 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
BlindEagle - nobody is against you, but two editors disagree with the inclusion of guard llama's in this article. You are the only editor insisting that this be included. That means that you do NOT have concensus. In fact, there is concensus to remove that See Also link. Despite the ongoing discussion, you continually revert the article to your version. Nobody is denying that llama's may be used to guard merinos, just that having that information in this article does NOT improve the article - whereas it might improve some other articles, which has already been suggested to you. Please remove that link and stop reverting this article to include it. If you do not remove the link, either VanTucky or I will have to seek mediation from an administrator; or you are free to do the same. Thanks Bob98133 (talk) 14:51, 6 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I completely agree with Bob. This isn't about you BlindEagle, it's about the content. In addition the things Bob notes above, I want to point out something you very well know: Google hits are not an acceptable argument in content disputes. They may be a helpful barometer at times, but they are not a reliable source and they don't contradict a consensus of editors. VanTucky 23:09, 6 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
BlindEagle - Put wikepedia first. Charles Esson (talk) 11:02, 8 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Swedish mulseing blowup

I've added a short note under animal welfare, looks like it is going to become important, perhaps more can be said.Charles Esson (talk) 11:02, 8 March 2008 (UTC). Put back in link to dispute over bribery claims, need for NPV. Charles Esson (talk) 08:11, 6 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

"Several Swedish and European clothing retailers, including H&M, Zara (clothing), and Lindex now no longer stock Merino products.[citation needed]"

I bought a 50% Merino garment from H&M in the UK the other day actually! 86.16.135.174 (talk) 12:44, 26 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This should surely be within striking distance of GA at least. Nice job

'nuff said. Cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 22:48, 10 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'll second that, it nice seeing stuff getting better. Charles Esson (talk) 08:33, 17 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Possum fur

If merino is mixed with every other fabric this should be included. I didn't see that it is. The introduction of the possum blend received a lot of publicity by the industry and is being marketed as new products, so I think that there should be a mention of it in the article. Bob98133 (talk) 14:53, 22 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Bod clearly your from New Zealand, trying to kill off our possums. I think you have done an excellent job with the article so I'm not going to argue, but I still think it's the wrong place. Merino wool is pretty much mixed with everything, it's a relatively cheap natural fibre and it spins easily. The merino/possum blend is a nice blend. Charles Esson (talk) 12:50, 9 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not from NZ and agree that the possum fur should be mentioned. It is a unusual and beautiful mix.Cgoodwin (talk) 21:20, 9 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Uppercase for Merino?

Re: recent change by Cgoodwin. I think that Merino with an uppercase M is correct for the breed of sheep, but I'm not sure that an uppercase M is required for the wool made from Merino sheep. I've left Cgoodwin's edit, but if someone is sure, or can cite a reference, that would be great. Google searches show both upper and lower case being used for the wool. Bob98133 (talk) 14:45, 1 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Athletic clothing

You may be aware that many people are willing to pay a premium for merino wool. Companies like Arc'teryx, Ibex, IceBreaker, SmartWool, and many others, sell base layers made from merino wool. Each piece can cost up to $100 USD. There are less expensive synthetic fabrics that are put to the same uses.

Wool has many useful properties in general, but some must be specific to merino wool, as it's the most common (type of wool) in high-end outdoor clothing. Some of this is softness - which is mentioned in the article's leader - although cashmere is arguably softer.

I came to this article after buying an expensive merino base layer, finding it to be the best winter clothing I own, and wanting to learn more about the stuff. I think it would make sense to devote a section of the article to merino wool's use in textiles made for outdoors exercise. I'll probably be bold and start one tomorrow if nobody beats me too it or objects strongly.

--SeattleHiker (talk) 00:49, 15 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Your additions would be very welcome.Cgoodwin (talk) 03:26, 15 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I took a stab at it, but what I wrote could use some improvement. I've tagged all the empirical claims with citation needed tags. I don't suppose these articles can be referenced?
Hi, Seattlehiker - no - using a company like REI who sell merino as a source about the product won't work. I removed a lot of the content that you placed in this section since it was not relevant. The article is about wool, so endless comparisons to cotton and synthetics are not needed. In addition, using high-end or other adjectives to describe a product cannot reasonably be proven. I've shopped at REI and the synthetics are far more expensive than wool - also warmer, more water resistant, etc. Natural products such as wool are not used in really cold conditions such as outer space, so claims that wool is the best for warmth are suspect. Stating that wool regulates body temperature is a bizarre claim - with a reference you might be able to say something like "wool helps the wearer regulate body temperature" since it is not the wool but the wearer who does the regulating. Sorry to be picky. I appreciate you adding this material, but it might be better if you included references rather than citation tags. Bob98133 (talk) 15:17, 18 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I don't think the reason wool isn't used in outer space has much to do with warmth. I would imagine space suit engineering, NASA red tape, and a host of other factors drive the decision about what fabrics to use.
I appreciate the help pruning the article, but disagree with some of the edits. First, this article is about merino wool, rather than wool in general. Merino is the only type of wool Arc'teryx uses, and to the best of my knowledge that's true of Ibex, IceBreaker, and SmartWool as well, for base layers for back country hiking, skiing, camping, etc, which is why I feel a section on outdoor sportswear is appropriate for an article on merino. And given that we're discussing why merino is popular, not just compared to other types of wool, but at all, I believe some comparisons to cotton and synthetic fibers are very relevant and appropriate.
I'm confused by your statement that "I've shopped at REI and the synthetics are far more expensive than wool - also warmer, more water resistant, etc." As a quick test, I just did a search ( on REI's site ) for Patagona Capeline ( a synthetic fiber ), and the first long-sleeve tee that comes up retails for $40, and the second is $55. When I repeat the test with merino, the first comparable item is $175, and the second is $70; what I've said earlier is factually true. The synthetics dry more quickly, but do not provide heat while they're wet, and apart from GoreTex and similar non-comparible fabrics, are less water resistant. These claims can be tested, and the easier ones to test quickly prove false.
Perhaps you can suggest a more agreeable wording for the claim that wool ( merino in particular ) helps with body temperature regulation. While REI and similar sources can be referenced for this claim, I realize that's not the best idea ... even thought REI sells synthetics which compete with wool ( therefor having less of a stake in promoting it ). In any case, I've been able to find a number of commercial references, and an even larger number of anecdotal references, that back up this claim, neither of which is valid here. However, it's an empirical claim, I've tested it myself and it's quite true, which everybody I know who's tried the stuff will attest to. On the other hand, this isn't an active research area in the sciences - papers are not being written for the journal Nature on this type of subject. All of this means that it's difficult to find a citation for this claim, even if it's easy to verify. I think it would be a disservice to remove true information, however. Maybe I'm missing something, or somebody has good advice on the matter?

--SeattleHiker (talk) 18:12, 18 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

As it stands, the material you added is totally unreferenced. Superlatives are hard claims to support, which is why I've removed them. Commercial references are just that - in it for the money. If the references exist, quote research that directly examines the claims you're making if such research exists. Information is not true because you believe it to be so, it requires references. I'll re-edit this in a day or so if it hasn't been referenced by then. For example, do you have references that merino is used in "high-end, performance athletic wear"? What does that mean? Who said that? If you are simply looking at ads and see that it is expensive, that is OR and does not necessarily mean that it is high-end. There is an effort to keep Wiki articles encyclopedic, so my thought is that it is better to omit unreferenced material and stick solely with material which can be reliably sourced. Bob98133 (talk) 20:37, 18 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Requested moves

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: not moved. Number 57 21:42, 10 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]


– The sheep variety isn't a WP:PRIMARYTOPIC candidate for any reason I can discern. The average reader is more likely to have heard of one of the people or places by this name. "Merino" isn't even an exclusively sheep-related term in animal breeding; while we may have the Merino sheep and Peppin Merino sheep, we also have the Merino cavy a.k.a. English Merino guinea pig. Use natural disambiguation per WP:NATURAL policy (there is no case for parenethical here, "Merino (sheep)" would just be longer and more obtuse for no benefit to the reader.)  — SMcCandlish ☺ ☏ ¢ ≽ʌⱷ҅ᴥⱷʌ≼  09:11, 2 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

  • Support: Merino is a common surname in Spain, not like García or Gonzaléz, but it is common. I support the reasons of SMcCandlish. Asturkian (talk) 10:25, 2 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Merino sheep has self explanatory value. Despite the presence of other definitions of Merino, the name "Merino" in isolation lacks explanation. Gregkaye ✍♪ 13:43, 2 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Question: I'm not so sure. I've only ever heard merino used to refer to the wool or the breed(s) of sheep it comes from, but of course I'm not in Spain and my anecdote isn't a stat. Have we evidence that it is not the primary topic? When I Google "merino" I get pages and pages of articles about the sheep or about wool products, and none about anything else at least 8 search result pages deep. If I go by ghits, "merino" hits 8.2M, "merino sheep" 4.6M, "merino wool" 3.6M, "carlos merino" 11.6M (all without quotes). I get more hits for "carlos merino" than for "merino" by itself so I think Google might be messing with me. Anyway I don't know what to make of this. Ivanvector (talk) 15:03, 2 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
    • @Ivanvector: That's actually a further rationale to disambiguate - the wool (not capitalized) is commonly referred to enough that it's yet another term to disambiguate, and it's more of a primary topic than the sheep themselves.  — SMcCandlish ☺ ☏ ¢ ≽ʌⱷ҅ᴥⱷʌ≼  08:52, 3 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. We don't seem to have a separate article on merino wool specifically; this article just links to wool. However, if we did, and assuming that an article could be written on merino wool specifically, then disambiguation would be an issue, so I support this move. Ivanvector (talk) 14:18, 3 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
We could and someday surely will have an article on the wool since it's an important product used worldwide, maybe more so than Cashmere wool about which we already have an article (probably because it's a luxury product, so it was a "sexy" article for someone to write).  — SMcCandlish ☺ ☏ ¢ ≽ʌⱷ҅ᴥⱷʌ≼  18:23, 8 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose. Has a strong claim for PrimaryTopic. An animal on which a nation rode, economically. The wool and the towns are named after the breed. The first hundreds of images from a google images search for "merino" makes it overwhelmingly clear that no one searching for another merino will be surprised to discover the sheep. If not the primary topic, surprisingly to me, "Merino sheep" appears to be natural [1] --SmokeyJoe (talk) 04:07, 10 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose, obvious primary topic. There are all sorts of problems here, principally that this article is currently almost entirely about the Australian Merino, which definitely merits a page of its own; but moving this page won't fix those. There are a dozen or so of these moves, all proposed by the same person. Others include:
  1. Talk:Flemish Giant (rabbit, cattle and sheep breeds)
  2. Talk:Corsican Cattle (21 cattle, sheep, goat and rabbit breeds)
  3. Talk:Canadian Speckle Park (2 cattle breeds)
  4. Talk:Dutch Landrace (8 pig and goat breeds)
  5. Talk:American Sable (3 rabbit and goat breeds)
  6. Talk:Russian Black Pied (4 cattle breeds) – closed as no no consensus
  7. Talk:Black Hereford (hybrid) (one cattle breed, one hybrid) - closed as not moved
  8. Talk:Blue Grey (2 cattle breeds, 1 cattle hybrid, 1 goat)
  9. Talk:Harz Red mountain cattle (one breed)
  10. Talk:Asturian Mountain (6 cattle, sheep and pig breeds)
  11. Talk:Romeldale/CVM (one sheep breed)
What I'd really like someone to explain (in no more than 50 words) is why this bizarre insistence on adding an explanatory suffix to the article title is being suggested only for domestic animal breeds. If it is necessary (and I don't think it is), then why is it not proposed throughout the project - leading to, say, Mini car, Alabama state and Hoatzin bird? Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 09:37, 10 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

Prince Xavier of Saxony

The said prince, was not an elector, but the son of an elector. 24.13.184.236 (talk) 18:45, 15 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Merino. 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:

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

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. —cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 18:14, 19 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Advertising?

Today's edit by GoSnug1 looks suspiciously like advertising, and the username is not acceptable, but have left untouched, as to me it's borderline and competently done. Doug butler (talk) 08:38, 25 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Assessment comment

The comment(s) below were originally left at Talk:Merino/Comments, and are posted here for posterity. Following several discussions in past years, these subpages are now deprecated. The comments may be irrelevant or outdated; if so, please feel free to remove this section.

As a Kiwi, I am concerned that the Animal Welfare section on Merino ignores the fact that mulesing is rarely used in New Zealand and is predomoninantly an Australian practice.

Most clothing companies using merino, including Icebreaker, Chocolate Fish and Howies, source their wool only from New Zealand Sheep Stations that do not practice mulesing. Icebreaker do this directly, and smaller companies like Chocolate Fish and Howies source through MAPP and Zque who guarantee that mulesing is not practiced on the stations where their wool is sourced. As it stands, the Merino entry in Wikipedia is misleading. Australian sheep stations practice mulesing, not because of the inherent nature of the sheep, but because of the climate conditions in which they are reared, and because of the type of fly endemic in those areas. In countries where the sheep are raised on high, cold pasture, the type of fly is different, and the incidence of fly strike greatly reduced, rendering mulesing unnecessary. It is perfectly possible for companies to continue selling Merino clothing, and customers to continue buying it, safe in the knowledge that it has been produced without mulesing. The Animal Welfare section should make this clear.

(Jude710 (talk) 12:00, 25 September 2008 (UTC))[reply]

Substituted at 21:22, 19 March 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Merino. 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) 04:28, 12 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Quality of merino wool on human skin?

Perhaps it is just me, but I cannot tolerate woolen clothing next to my skin - no hives or a swollen throat, but lots of itching and some redness. I CANNOT WAIT to rip it off. Merino wool is not as bad on my skin - I can easily tolerate it for a few hours. Is this a real quality of merino wool as compared to the usual sheep's wool? Or is it just a quirk of my own? Thank you for your time, Wordreader (talk) 23:19, 10 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://mdwiki.org/wiki/Talk:Merino"