Talk:Aidi

Possible image

http://www.thebreedsofdogs.com/images/CHIEN_DE_LATLAS.jpg I don't think the picture is undercopyright protection. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 69.249.56.185 (talk • contribs) .

It is copyrighted unless otherwise stated. -SCEhardT 05:57, 29 January 2006 (UTC)

Aidi photo here http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Image:Aidi.jpg

Isn't that a Moroccan Dog?

@M.BittonWell, I thought they called it a Moroccan dog. Since according to the article it has Moroccan origins. But okay. What do you mean by tree? Because the rest is edited for you, I just introduced “Moroccan Dog”. Wasserschneider (talk) 14:27, 1 April 2024 (UTC) Blocked sock. M.Bitton (talk) 19:41, 11 April 2024 (UTC)

Feel free to add it back if you can find a reliable source that says that this dog is "also known" as a Moroccan dog. M.Bitton (talk) 14:43, 1 April 2024 (UTC)

okay. No, it's better that way, because it previously said "Origin:Morocco". I didn't dare to remove it. But okay, the article it's perfect like this. Wasserschneider (talk) 14:49, 1 April 2024 (UTC)

May 2024

@Traumnovelle: please use the talk page and refrain from edit warring. M.Bitton (talk) 21:52, 17 May 2024 (UTC)

Of course we're going to have to revert to your version, which has unsourced material and removes content for no PAG based reasoning.

Please provide a source that states North Africa instead of Morocco and please explain why a language tag is inappropriate for a word derived from a foreign language. Traumnovelle (talk) 05:27, 18 May 2024 (UTC)

Actually, it's your version that is unsourced.

The cited sources already state the origin as North Africa. If you're referring to the FCI, then it says the same thing and the term "origin" (at the top of the standard) is used by the organization to refer to the "country of patronage or development" and not to the origin of the breed (as you seem to think). Not that it makes any difference in this case, but it's also worth noting that the FCI is not a scholarly source (unlike the Encyclopédie berbère, which is already cited).

Since you want to add the Berber language, the onus to explain why and which script should be used is entirely on you. M.Bitton (talk) 23:43, 18 May 2024 (UTC)

Funny the actual citation says the breed is from Morocco: https://web.archive.org/web/20140311030151/http://www.easypetmd.com/doginfo/aidi

You're obviously quite familiar with Wikipedia but is basic fact checking beyond your ability?

>Not that it makes any difference in this case, but it's also worth noting that the FCI is not a scholarly source (unlike the Encyclopédie berbère, which is already cited).

Which calls it a Berber Atlas dog?

>Since you want to add the Berber language, the onus to explain why and which script should be used is entirely on you

Because the name comes from the Berber language. Traumnovelle (talk) 06:57, 19 May 2024 (UTC)

"the breed is from Morocco" Is it only native to Morocco? No, the dog pays no regard to borders and is found all over the Atlas Mountains of North Africa.[1]

"Because the name comes from the Berber language" There are multiple Berber languages and scripts. The language tag you keep on adding is WP:OR. Skitash (talk) 10:02, 19 May 2024 (UTC)

You can find Old English Sheepdogs all over the world, the origin of the dog is still England.

>The language tag you keep on adding is WP:OR

I'll take your word on that given I'm unfamiliar with the language.

Everything else still stands. And by the way I suggest you actually read the citations instead of using non-P&G arguments about nationalities into a dog breed article. Traumnovelle (talk) 11:34, 19 May 2024 (UTC)

While ignoring the personal remarks that you kept throwing from the get-go was perhaps the right thing to do, casting aspersions (like you did above) won't be tolerated; so now you have two choices: you can either strike that uncalled for comment or you take it to ANI and substantiate it there. In the meantime, I will reply to the previous comment.

Funny the actual citation.. there is nothing "funny" about describing the least reliable of all the cited sources as "the actual citation". I suggest you familiarize yourself with WP:RS.

Which calls it a Berber Atlas dog nope. The Berber encyclopedia calls it many things, but it doesn't call it a "Berber Atlas dog". Being by far the most reliable of all the cited sources, it also describes the origin of the breed in details and it's certainly not Morocco.

I will ask you one more time: please explain why a Berber language is needed and which script should be used. This time, try not to ignore the important underlined part. M.Bitton (talk) 23:10, 19 May 2024 (UTC)

You accused other editors of being nationalist first.

>Funny the actual citation.. there is nothing "funny" about describing the least reliable of all the cited sources as "the actual citation". I suggest you familiarize yourself with WP:RS.

It's the source that substantiated the supposedly substanited the more general North African origin, I agree it's a poor source but you chose to mention it.

Here are further reliable sources that also repeat Morocco: https://www.google.it/books/edition/The_Dog_Encyclopedia/cBGmEAAAQBAJ?hl=en&gbpv=1&dq=aidi+dog&pg=PA68&printsec=frontcover https://www.google.it/books/edition/Our_Debt_to_the_Dog/0esAAgAAQBAJ?hl=en&gbpv=1&dq=aidi+dog&pg=PT82&printsec=frontcover https://www.google.it/books/edition/Dogs/EXxmEAAAQBAJ?hl=en&gbpv=1&dq=aidi+dog&pg=PA291&printsec=frontcover

>Which calls it a Berber Atlas dog nope.

My French is bad, you're correct that it doesn't.

>it also describes the origin of the breed in details and it's certainly not Morocco.

Which paragraph number are you referring to?

>I will ask you one more time: please explain why a Berber language is needed and which script should be used. This time, try not to ignore the important underlined part

Your friend already gave an actual legitimate reason to remove it. The fact that there are multiple scripts is a valid reason to not include it, although said French source clearly establishes the name as a Berber term. The Morocco article seems to manage to choose a script and goes with Standard Moroccan Tamazight but I cannot speak the language. Traumnovelle (talk) 05:29, 20 May 2024 (UTC)

I said what I needed to say about your increasing personalization of the discussion that reached uncalled for aspersions casting, so unless you either strike that personal attack or take your accusations to ANI, you will simply be ignored. M.Bitton (talk) 15:01, 20 May 2024 (UTC)

So you're just WP:STONEWALLING the discussion after it hasn't gone your way? We're here to discuss whether the origin should be listed as Morocco or Maghreb/North Africa. Currently all the English sources state Morocco and you're refusing to be helpful and highlight which part of the French enyclopaedia supports your claim. Traumnovelle (talk) 18:45, 20 May 2024 (UTC)

If you have no further objections I am going to write what the sources state. Traumnovelle (talk) 06:57, 22 May 2024 (UTC)

I don't need to convince you, and given your persistent personalization of the discussion, I certainly don't feel like helping you. If you don't like it, ANI is thataway and if you try to impose your POV through an edit war (in full knowledge that you have no consensus for it), then you will be reported to the admins. I hope this clears up any confusion. M.Bitton (talk) 16:45, 22 May 2024 (UTC)

@Traumnovelle since no-one in this conversation seems to speak a Berber language, here is some of my input; Aydi (ⴰⵢⴷⵉ) means "dog" in virtually every Berber dialect (Tachelhit, Atlas Tamazight, Kabyle, and Tariffit), there's still an ongoing RfC on the use of Neo-Tifinagh which is used in Morocco rather than Latin in other countries.

I'd argue that claiming that "aydi" means "dog" in Berber languages is far from OR per WP:TRANSCRIPTION, it can be verified by checking one of the plenty dictionaries for Berber languages. I don't know why such a fuss is made about Berber languages, there are a number of native speakers of each respective dialect on this website. NAADAAN (talk) 11:41, 25 May 2024 (UTC)

Nobody is making a fuss about the Berber language and the fact that Aidi simply means dog in Berber is well known and mentioned in the Berber Encyclopedia, but that doesn't address the issue of the script (that's what the issue is about, as repeated at least three times). M.Bitton (talk) 11:46, 25 May 2024 (UTC)

(Berber languages: ⴰⵢⴷⵉ, romanized: aydi, lit. 'dog'); issue resolved? it has both ways of writing Berber languages. NAADAAN (talk) 11:52, 25 May 2024 (UTC)

Why tifinagh? What about the Arabic script? M.Bitton (talk) 12:04, 25 May 2024 (UTC)

Include through every way to transcribe a language would set a pretty painful precedent, wouldn't we need to also inlucde Hebrew with Judeo-Berber? Georgian has four writing scripts including Cyrillic. Despite this, virtually every Georgia-related article opts for Mkhedruli above all other ones. I recommend you read this manuscript by CNRS linguist Lameen Souag. NAADAAN (talk) 12:16, 25 May 2024 (UTC)

Include all of them in a footnote. M.Bitton (talk) 12:20, 25 May 2024 (UTC)

Why? Including Hebrew? That'd be a beautiful way to quadruple the verifiability problem. NAADAAN (talk) 12:25, 25 May 2024 (UTC)

Is the Berber language written in Hebrew (in North Africa)? M.Bitton (talk) 12:27, 25 May 2024 (UTC)

I have no knowledge of the language so cannot comment further on the matter. I do support the inclusion and don't believe lacking every script it's written it in is grounds to exclude however. Traumnovelle (talk) 22:53, 25 May 2024 (UTC)

RfC on breed origin

The RfC resolves primarily around whether the origin of the breed should be listed as Morocco or North Africa (or any alternative location). Traumnovelle (talk) 06:44, 24 May 2024 (UTC)

I support listing the origin of Morocco based on that being listed as the origin by multiple reliable sources, for example: [2] [3] [4] as well as by the Fédération Cynologique Internationale. Traumnovelle (talk) 06:51, 24 May 2024 (UTC)

• North Africa. Contrary to what the RfC initiator claims, their sources (regardless of their dubious reliability) either don't mention the origin or mention Spain in passing. As for the Fédération Cynologique Internationale, as I already explained in the previous discussion, the term "origin" (at the top of the standard) is used by the organization to refer to the "country of patronage or development" and not to the origin of the breed. The standard form of the FOC is filled by the members (which explain "our mountains" in the description).

The only reliable source that goes into into some details about the origin says (wikilinks added by myself):

While the neolithic North Africans were familiar with domestic dogs which they represented in their rock art, the representations only multiplied in the late period... In the North and in the South, two breeds are recognized, one of them is the ancestor of the current Kabyle dog. A very vigilant and aggressive guard dog when in a pack, it seems to have carried out this mission since Antiquity. We know that Massinissa was guarded by dogs. The aggressiveness of this breed explains why it was trained for war by the Garamantes. It was used occasionally for hunting and, in rare circumstances, for food... This dog is depicted in certain engravings in the Atlas (Aïn Marshal, Tiout, Merdoufa, Khanguet el Hadjar) but these do not have the clarity of the Saharan rock paintings which sometimes represent a robust dog with erect ears and a plumed tail that is garnished with abundant hair... In the Tell, the precise iconographic documents on this breed date to the Roman period. A sarcophagus from the Skikda Museum shows at the foot of a man a dog quite similar to an “Atlas shepherd”, the erect ears, the plumed tail and the proportions of this breed are recognizable; however there is a good chance that this marble sarcophagus was sculpted in Italy.

The part about the neolithic period is also covered in this reliable source. While the part about the Garamantes, the aggressivity of the breed and its current habitat in the Saharan Atlas is also covered in this reliable source.

The Kabyle dog is one of two breeds that are indigenous to North Africa. It is known locally simply as "dog" ("Aydi" in Berber and "Kelb" in Arabic). In French, it's known as "Berger de l'Atlas" (Atlas sheepdog), "Berger d'Algérie" (Algerian sheepdog), "Chien Kabyle" (Kabyle dog), "chien Arabe" (Arab dog), "Kelb des Arabes" (Arab's dog) and "Chien des Douars" (dog of the douars). In Dutch, it's known as "Algerijnse herdershond" (Algerian sheepdog). It's been known by those names ever since the French started writing about it (almost two centuries ago). The adoption of the name Aidi in European sources is a fairly recent one (my guess is that it's mostly due to the fact that it was registered with the FOC under this name, a name that unlike the others, is not used as an insult in North Africa).

I didn't cite the sources for what is easily attributable, but I will happily do so if necessary. M.Bitton (talk) 15:34, 24 May 2024 (UTC)

The sources I've used are published by a reputable publisher, they are not of 'dubious reliability'.

Your source states a dog 'quite similar', not necessarily the same dog. The other passage says 'ancestor', again not the breed. This is an article about a standardised breed and not an ancient landrace in North Africa.

Your claim about the FCI is false as you can see here: https://www.fci.be/Nomenclature/Standards/344g05-en.pdf the origin is listed separately to the country of development. Traumnovelle (talk) 17:57, 24 May 2024 (UTC)

Your claim about the FCI is false Here's the supporting source about what the word "origin" (as used by the FCI) stands for. One can easily read "ORIGIN: If required name of the country of patronage or development". Besides, the FCI is not a scholarly source.

The source This highlights your inability to assess what the sources say, so please do me a big favour and don't reply to my comments again. I have no interest in replying to your cherry picking, let alone teach you the basics. Thank you. M.Bitton (talk) 18:11, 24 May 2024 (UTC)

>Besides, the FCI is not a scholarly source.

Scholary sources aren't needed to list the origin of a dog breed. You seem unable to differentiate between an ancient landrace and the modern breed: the origin of the English Shepherd is listed as United States despite descending from imported British dogs. The Aidi is not the same as the landrace depicted in cave paintings thousands of years ago. Traumnovelle (talk) 18:18, 24 May 2024 (UTC)

What part of please don't reply to my comments don't you understand? Anyway, read my comment (including the other sources) or don't (I don't care), but for the last time, please refrain from bludgeoning the RfC. M.Bitton (talk) 18:22, 24 May 2024 (UTC)

Please withdraw your remark, I have not bludgeoned this RfC and was going to refrain from replying to your last comment until you made that accusation. Traumnovelle (talk) 18:37, 24 May 2024 (UTC)

This isn't a user-talk page, but a community discussion page, so "don't reply to my comments" isn't applicable here.  — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼  04:13, 25 May 2024 (UTC)

It is when when context is taken into account. What's the point of them replying to me if I have no wish to interact with them (see prior discussion)? M.Bitton (talk) 12:02, 25 May 2024 (UTC)

• North Africa: per M.Bitton. The RfC initiator's sources only make passing mentions, while the sole reliable source indicates that the origins of the Aidi can be traced back to the entirety of North Africa, including Algeria. Skitash (talk) 17:19, 24 May 2024 (UTC)
• Morocco. The OP is correct that the modern standardized breed is being confused with the landrace variety that was its (or most of its) foundation stock, the sources being bandied about above pertain to the landrace not the breed. The article's main-body text needs to be clear on the distinction, and indicate that the modern breed was developed in Morocco from a landrace type of generally similar dog common to the broader region of North Africa. FCI may have a particular narrow definition of what they mean by "origin", but it is actually the one pertinent here: the place at which the standardized breed was (or predominantly was) established, not "the region from which the breed's background genepool is derived". Cf., e.g., Turkish Van, a standardized breed developed in England, from stock brought from various parts of Turkey, mostly Ankara, versus Van cat, a landrace with a confusingly similar name (which may have been partially ancestral to the standardized breed, though even this is not proven). We correctly identify the former as British from Turkish stock, and the latter as Turkish geographically and Turkish, Armenian, and Kurdish culturally. Back to Aidi, we don't appear to have cause for two separate articles, so this one article has to cover both the underlying landrace and the modern standardized breed clearly and accurately, and the modern breed is clearly the primary aspect of the combined topic.  — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼  04:13, 25 May 2024 (UTC)

  PS: The fact that Aidi derives from a Berber word aydi simply meaning 'dog' is irrelevant; lots of standardized animal breeds have unhelpful names, some of which coincide with or overlap landrace-related meanings in other languages from which the standardized-breed names were lifted. Happens all the time, pretty often on purpose when breeders want to promotionally equate their new commercialized strain of animals with historical animals that are likely not closely if at all related to the lineage of the animals they are selling (or selling stud access to). This problem is consistent enough that as breed-article-editing encyclopedists we have to be on the lookout for it and not incidentally help promote breeders' BS marketing claims by blindly repeating their attempts to cloud the distinction between their modern and rather inbred and extremely selectively-bred (generally for appearance, sometimes for behavior) breeds, and historic landraces that had hybrid vigour and natural adaptation to their environments (through much less human-controlled breeding, geared primarily toward health when selective).  — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼  08:16, 25 May 2024 (UTC)

  The origin of the Aidi is only mentioned in passing, with some sources stating North Africa. The sources that I cited mention the breed (they even use the word "breed"). Are you suggesting that the Aidi and the Algerian sheepdog are two different breeds? M.Bitton (talk) 11:58, 25 May 2024 (UTC) M.Bitton (talk) 11:58, 25 May 2024 (UTC)

  WP:STRAWMAN; the standardized Aïdi breed was established in Morocco based off what I understood from @SMcCandlish, I don't think you properly addressed the argument raised. To answer your question, if it's established through verifiable sources (I was unable to find any from a quick search) that an Algerian sheepdog are indeed a distinct standardized breed -- so be it. NAADAAN (talk) 12:08, 25 May 2024 (UTC)

  Established how exactly? You haven't answered my question: either the Aidi and the Algerian sheepdog ("the", not "an") are two different breeds or they are not. M.Bitton (talk) 12:15, 25 May 2024 (UTC)

  Established as in selectively-bred. You can start another discussion and present your sources if you wish to pursue this line of questioning, but this isn't relevant to the main point made here. NAADAAN (talk) 12:19, 25 May 2024 (UTC)

  Selectively bred how and when did it start? The origin of the breed needs to be established per RS. M.Bitton (talk) 12:22, 25 May 2024 (UTC)

  According to the FCI, the breed has existed since time immemorial in the mountains and on the plateaux of North Africa. The UKFC states, without mentioning the word origin, that the breed has existed for many centuries in the mountains and on the plateaus of North Africa. M.Bitton (talk) 13:26, 25 May 2024 (UTC)

Comment if you look at the infobox for Burmese cat you can see it lists where the original animals were taken from and where the standardised breed was developed. Would this be an okay solution? Traumnovelle (talk) 06:12, 12 July 2024 (UTC)

• That's promotional nonsense by breeders (who run FCI, UKFC, and every organisation like it; all the kennel clubs and their equivalents for other domesticated animals exist for breeder promotional purposes). They intentionally use the word "breed" in one way (to mean what it normally means, and what it means for purposes of WP articles and their categorization: a standardized breed, i.e. a variety established through tightly controlled selective breeding to fit a written breed standard), and this serves most of their marketing purposes, which are geared toward show-quality conformance. But they happily do an about face, when it serves another marketing goal toward the pocketbooks of a side market, and intentionally misuse the word to mean something radically different, pretty much the diametric opposite: a landrace variety back to early history or even prehistory that is mentioned in pre-modern texts or depicted in pre-modern art and which can be wilfully misrepresented as identical to the standardized breed, and more honestly (sometimes) can be represented as ancestral to that breed. Using "breed" to mean "breed" and then misusing it to mean "landrace" is common false advertising, but it's still false. It's bullshit. A landrace and a standardized breed are not equivalent and literally cannot be equivalent, by definition. No amount of fallacy of equivocation by breed-promotional individuals and organizations can change that (and their attempts to confuse the public into equating their standardized-breed animals with either ancient possibly related animals of a different sort, or even current landrace animals of a possibly related but still different sort, is ultimately WP:FRINGE. It is not possible for a landrace to be a standardized breed or vice versa. They are an entirely different class of animal population, even if the latter are often derived highly selectively from the former).

  As for whether there is a standardized breed Aidi and a standardized breed Algerian Sheepdog (which would be written with a capital S), and whether they are sometimes or always equivalent, is going to depend entirely and only on a survey of the breed standards and their classifications in every major kennel club. It is not uncommon for different breed registries to use different names for the same or essentially the same breed. As for whether the Aidi standardized breed is the same as a landrace called Algerian sheepdog (lowercase s): no, that is not possible, though they could be related. At any rate, no such phrase "Algerian [s|S]heepdog" even appears anywhere in our article, so I have no idea why that phrase was brought up. It's certainly not central to the discussion in any way. My guess is that it's another term for the landrace population or a particular subset of it.

  The entire text of the article is presently badly confusing a wide-ranging landrace with a narrow and very recent standardized breed, and treating them as if they are synonymous. This is intolerably poor encyclopedic work. With regard to English breeds, for example, nothing like this would have happened. No way, no how, would dog editors have ever confused (or permitted to become confused) the Staffordshire Bull Terrier (extant standardized breed) with the bull and terrier cross-breed landrace from which it was developed, or that in turn with the Old English Bulldog (ancestral extinct alleged breed, almost certainly actually a landrace, and properly written "old English bulldog", since it pre-dated the keeping of meticulous studbooks if any at all and the writing of breed standards), nor confuse that in turn with the English Bulldog, an extant standardized breed. They're all directly related, but they are not the same, and enough editors (and even readers) understand that, so no one is going to try to BS their way past that understanding, because too many people know better and will not stand for it.

  But there is insuffient common-knowledge about more obscure dog populations among "dog people", so there has been more exploitable wiggle room to attempt bullshitty "the dogs I'm selling are ancient" nonsense to try to squeeze in there. (Especially since various tertiary sources also sow such confusion; a bunch of the "breed encyclopedia" books attempt to enumerate every named dog population of any kind as a "breed" simply so its author can claim it lists more "breeds" than competing works of the same sort. Yet more marketing bullshit.) We must not permit this confusion. There is no such thing as a standardized breed that is ancient, because breed standardization did not exist until the modern era, and breeds themselves (depite constant efforts by breeders) do not remain consistent over time but are a moving target. The most chronologically grandiose thing that can be truthfully said about any modern, standardized breed is that it has been bred to resemble pre-modern historical animals from which it is descended (partly or entirely). But ultimately all dogs are as "ancient" as all other dogs, since they all derive untimately from the original tamed wolf stock of the Stone Age humans of Eurasia.  — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼  14:50, 25 May 2024 (UTC)

  If the breeders who run the FCI, UKFC, and every organisation like it are peddling nonsense, then why are we promoting their views so prominently? M.Bitton (talk) 15:15, 25 May 2024 (UTC)

  I ask essentially this question and argue against doing it frequently, regard to breeds in general, especially dogs and cats where the BS level runs thick and hot. In short, breeder-operated registries are reliable sources for the content of their own breed standards' conformation points and such, and for facts about when that organization accepted which breeds in what category, and other such WP:ABOUTSELF matters, but they are not RS for claims about "antiquity", origins, and other matters that tie directly into the marketing of the animals for sale, because they then fail the WP:INDY test, having a direct pecuniary interest in spinning romanticized yarns and confusing distinctions between populations to make the animals they are selling (as breeders) and selling registrations of (as registries) seem more impressive than they really are (in ways that range from historico-cultural to health/medical-related).  — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼  15:56, 31 May 2024 (UTC)

  If the article is about the breed, then the origin is clearly North Africa, but if we decide to make it about some standardized breed (according to some kennel clubs), then the origin of that special breed needs to be established (assuming, we don't believe those who keep the standards and their claims that the breed has existed for centuries). What we cannot have, is an article that (through some weird cherry picking) confuses the two, or worse, their origin. M.Bitton (talk) 15:15, 25 May 2024 (UTC)

• Morocco: per @SMcCandlish, the landrace North African dogs which formed the breed don't constitute an "origin country" of the current Aïdi breed; this is self-evident. NAADAAN (talk) 06:08, 25 May 2024 (UTC)
• North Africa: per @M.Bitton, there is no information available at present on how, when and where the breed was derived from the landrace. SMcCandlish offers a sensible general explanation of why a standardised breed is not identical with a landrace, but there is currently no evidence for how this actually happened in the specific case of Aidi. It would need to be proven with sources that Aidi in the sense of a standardised breed was actually derived in Morocco. The article currently states, citing sources, that the breed "is most commonly found in Morocco" and that it "is also found in Algeria, Tunisia and Libya". It says nothing about the breed's origin that "a club has recently been formed in Morocco". This is everything that can be said without resorting to theories. VampaVampa (talk) 16:33, 30 May 2024 (UTC)

References