User talk:Keetanii

Your welcome. Likewise, I thought your additions to the article have moved it along very nicely.

The Bibliography in Further Reading has a lots of good sources that have not yet been worked into the Health section. Similarly, the source in footnote 31 has a lot of specific information.

Stay in touch. Happy editing! 7&6=thirteen (☎) 14:20, 5 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there, sorry to stick my nose in but I saw you'd nominated American Akita for a GA and thought I'd mention a couple of minor things I noticed from a quick read before someone reviews it properly. The first issue is pretty straight forward - the lead is a bit short for the length of the article. I think that can be improved by adding mentions of Hachikō, and some other history snippets as well as a line about the description (something like the breed is a mid height breed with x types of coat... there's plenty of examples in the existing GA's). The other issue would require more work is the health section which reads as a bit of a list and a reviewer may ask for it to be reformatted into prose. Hope this helps, I'm sure that the article will pass GA with a little work as there's been such a great deal of work done on improving it. Miyagawa (talk) 18:55, 17 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks so much Miyagawa!!! I'll get right on to that. I really appriciate the advice and help! Cheers Keetanii (talk) 07:34, 18 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I changed the health section into prose, but it has been reverted back by another editor. In some ways I think a list is more useful than prose. It is also easier for others to come an add things later on. If you take a look at the section in edit mode, trying to keep all the citations and keep some kind of real idea what you are trying to say with all those conditions is painfully difficult. Other breed ages with the breed conditions in prose only list a few select conditions that their breed has been known to have, but in doing so they leave out a lot of information. What do you think? Keetanii (talk) 09:11, 19 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Keetani, I edited back in a different form. I did not 'revert' it. I thought the format of the single paragraph prose was confusing did not make the points clearly. If you take a look at the two relevant text versions of the article (not the edit section, because the footnotes make it completely undecipherable), I think you might agree. This is one time when bullet points (see WP:MOS) work more effectively than prose, I think. There is a whole lot of information there, and 'too much water was randomly flowing over the dam', so to speak, leaving the reader confused and adrift. I did think that maybe we might use some kind of format clue (type face, italics, bold or subections?) to separate the three big paragraphs to give readers a visual clue, but I didn't do that. Those are just some suggestions and food for thought. 7&6=thirteen (☎) 11:21, 19 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

LOL sorry Thirteen, we seem to have differences when it comes to be pedantic about words used in talk pages :P revert or changed back in a slightly different form amount to about the same thing in my book, and I have no qualms at all that you did, I like it! I totally agree that the citations make it almost indecipherable! I like it how you changed it, too much bold type or italics just looks gaudy. Cheers! Keetanii (talk) 11:25, 19 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I'm just sensitive to the use of the word "revert" as it implies (a) the undone edit was not done in good faith; and (b) that I used my position as a reverter contrary to the promise I made when I was so entrusted. Of course, none of that was true, and I know you were using the word revert is a less pejorative way.

I do think that this long list might imply that there is something more wrong with the breed than other breeds, etc. That might even be true. Like a lot of breeds that suffered during World War II (e.g., Leonberger, Bernese Mountain Dog), the founding breed stock got so depleted that some genetic issues have developed. Indeed, the whole concept of dog breeds created issues, like the flat faces on various types of bulldogs, that implicate health risk (e.g., popped eyes). Trying to put this all into proper perspective is the issue. BTW, those articles all suggest other types of ways that we might want to deal with (or add) regarding health issues.

Thanks for the cookie. 7&6=thirteen (☎) 13:15, 19 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I agree it does make it look like the Akita is an unhealthy breed, I'm not sure that it is true that they are in fact less resilient than other breeds. I think the problem more lies with the lack of information listed on other breed pages. People who love that particular breed don't often like to mention alot of breed related conditions in fear that it might make their favoiurite breed look bad. Well thats just my opinion anyway. I will start expanding some other breed page health sections when I get the chance. If you look at the Sebaceous adenitis page, there are breeds listed there that don't have the condition listed on the breed page, and I am sure this is true of many many other conditions. What would be nice is to find some literature that states the relative occurances of these conditions in the breed, but I don't think that kind of data is yet available. Keetanii (talk) 03:18, 20 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Some of the smaller organizations that are involved with breeds have sponsored mortality and morbidity studies, or studies that relate to specific condition. I had a Bernese Mountain dog and two Leonbergers, and was aware of them at the time. It takes really caring and responsible organizations to confront those kinds of problems head on, particularly as it may implicate particular breed lines (like the progenitors of Malignant Hystiocytosis in Bernese). Of course, the quality of dog articles in Wikipedia is idiosyncratic, inconsistent, and otherwise 'all over the map.' 7&6=thirteen (☎) 03:42, 20 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I think the merger of the two articles worked out splendidly. 7&6=thirteen (☎) 21:25, 2 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks :) Keetanii (talk) 23:11, 2 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! There are some people on here who have a "battleground mentality", unfortunately, and it's unpleasant but quite easy to get caught up with. Thankfully, none of those incidents have been with regular contributors in any area, as far as I recall, and most people focus on the content and not whoever is editing it. It's only sensible when many people are going by pseudonyms and aren't publishing the extent of their experiences in the dog world (undoubtedly important but not everything, as there's book and scientific knowledge too!) Your note is definitely appreciated :) – anna 00:23, 20 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Anna has eaten your {{cookie}}! The cookie made them happy and they'd like to give you a great big hug for donating it. Spread the WikiLove by giving out more {{cookie}}s, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Thanks again! Spread the goodness of cookies by adding {{subst:cookie}} to someone's talk page with a friendly message, or eat a cookie with {{subst:munch}}!

I see you have it up for GA. Am going to suggest that before it goes to review, you move the Hypothyroidism information into immune-mediated endocrine diseases instead of autoimmune diseases.

Am going to ask you a favor if you don't mind-am thinking of putting Diabetes in dogs up for GA but need someone who's not as "close" to it as I am to have a look at it. Thanks, We hope (talk) 17:51, 31 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Sure I can do that :) Thannkyou for your advice, I wasn't completly sure where it should go. I'll move it now :) Cheers, Keetanii

Thanks for your help! Have made the suggested changes. I believe I have some additional links for you re: Sebaceous adenitis-it has also been diagnosed in rabbits and in a horse. Where would you like them-here or on the article's talk page? Also ran into another good spot besides WSAVA for free access to medical literature-Western Veterinary Conference Proceedings 2005-2011. Thanks again! We hope (talk) 17:47, 1 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Here would be fine, I'll definately put them into the article! That would be great thanks! Keetanii (talk) 02:12, 2 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

For your working in merging into Akita (dog). I can't GA review the merged article, but please call me of you want discuss it. --Philcha (talk) 18:14, 6 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Philcha :) Keetanii (talk) 00:51, 7 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• Histopathological differences between canine idiopathic sebaceous adenitis and canine leishmaniosis with sebaceous adenitis Vet Dermatol. 2010 Apr;21(2):159-65. Epub 2009 Aug 19.
• Sebaceous adenitis in Havanese dogs: a retrospective study of the clinical presentation and incidence Veterinary Dermatology Volume 22, Issue 3, pages 267–274, June 2011 (Suggest checking back with this one after 4 June as the url may be different due to the system message you see in the url.)
• Another copy of the abstract above.
• Slideshow from a fourth year dermatology resident-this might be a good external link.
• Sebaceous adenitis VetStream Lapis (rabbits) UK
• Successful treatment of sebaceous adenitis in a rabbit with ciclosporin and triglycerides. Vet Dermatol. 2009 Feb;20(1):67-71.
• Application for Sebaceous adenitis database page 2 of this shows how the biopsy skin punches have to be taken for diagnosis.
• Determining whether risk for sebaceous adenitis of Standard Poodles is associated with a specific DLA class II genotype University of California-Davis School of Veterinary Medicine
• Skin Diseases of the Dog and Cat 937 page book for download.
• Treatment of a moderate case of sebaceous adenitis
• A Busy Clinician's Review of cyclosporine DVM 360 1 May 2008
• Sebaceous Adenitis: A New Therapy Option--Case Report WSAVA 2009
• ESAVS COURSE 2, WEEK 1, AUGUST 2006
• Adenohypophysitis Associated with Sebaceous Gland Atrophy in a Dog Vet Pathol 1991 28: 340
• Sebaceous adenitis VetStream Canis UK
• How I Treat Sebaceous Adenitis Western Veterinary Conference 2009
• Diseases that can fool us: page 22 Stephen D. White {SA found in cats also-you'll see it too in the slideshow above as she has photos of affected cats)
• Small and Large Aminal Dermatology Disorders of Keratinization Skin Diseases-University of Minnesota College of Veterinary Medicine

Guess I know what you'll be doing for a while-reading! :) We hope (talk) 05:33, 2 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

WOOOH wow thankyou!!! YAY Keetanii (talk) 06:58, 2 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

There's currently an issue with the proceedings of the Western Veterinary Conference. The omnibooks site is still down and there's been no reply from WVC regarding my e-mail. The SA link you have here: How I Treat Sebaceous Adenitis Western Veterinary Conference 2009, now gives a "file not found" error. Have been trying to locate some of the proceedings hosted elsewhere. I did find the SA paper at DocStoc. If you want to use it as a ref, getting the "embed" url link will work. We hope (talk) 02:03, 11 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, thankyou so much for that!! It should be fixed now. :) Cheers - Keetanii (talk) 10:16, 11 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Have to confess this is my first time nominating an article for GA. Re: Perry Como, I just kept working at it; someone else nominated it.  :) We hope (talk) 14:41, 5 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Keetanii, hope you're doing well! I've put up a thread on the reliable source noticeboard you may be interested in: Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard#Nineteen dog breed sources in question

I'll be looking at the Akita articles when I get the chance and weighing in on the proposed merger. Leaning towards merging but want to analyze them in depth a bit more. Anna ^talk 23:33, 9 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Anna, I've been away for a while with an old sick dog to care for. Will be back online soon. The above thread looks interesting! Cheers Keetanii (talk) 07:04, 12 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. You have a new message at Anna's talk page. Message added 03:16, 20 July 2011 (UTC).[reply]

Hi, Keetanii. I see you've nom'ed Akita (dog) for GA - good luck. There a few issues I suggest you address now, before review comments appear:

• The lead is only 1 para. I'd suggest 4, e.g.: history (the original Akita dog, the near extermination in WWII, and the split into the Japanese and American varieties); the various show dog regulations; temperament; and health.
• Missing final citations in: "US servicemen fell in love with the Akita and imported many of them into the US upon and after their return" (end for "Japanese History"); "This includes the common Shiba Inu coloring pattern .. on the underside of jaw, neck, chest, body and tail and on the inside of the legs" (last para of "Appearance"); "They are however known to be intolerant of other dogs, as stated in the AKC breed standard" (in "Temperament"); "However all care and caution should be taken with children and large dogs. Not all Akitas, nor all dogs, will necessarily have a correct temperament" (in "Temperament"); some of the bullet points on "Immune-mediated endocrine diseases" don't end with citations; similar in "Non immune specific conditions"; the extended explanation of "seudohyperkalemia" in "Breed specific conditions". Please check for any other missing citations.
• There's a "disambiguation needed" in "Japanese History".

There's little I can do as I'm ill, but feel free to ask if you have no other resource. --Philcha (talk) 13:42, 3 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Ahh yes of course, thankyou :) I hope you feel better soon. Cheers, Keetanii (talk) 23:10, 3 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I see that Akita (dog) is now a GA - a reward for your hard work!

I hope your enthusiasm returns. --Philcha (talk) 07:40, 16 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Keetanii. Please take a look. Cheers. I think we're making good progress on the GA. Cheers. 7&6=thirteen (☎) 16:39, 4 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

A GA - congratulations. --Philcha (talk) 20:59, 12 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thankyou Philcha, Cheers, Keetanii (talk) 23:02, 12 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

You'll be missed. Illegitimi non carborundum

7&6=thirteen (☎) 01:42, 16 October 2011 (UTC)[reply] 

Akita (dog), an article that you or your project may be interested in, has been nominated for a community good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status will be removed from the article.

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:45, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]