Talk:Tibetan Mastiff

Tibetan mastiff from China?

A couple of drive-by edits changed the country in the information box from "Tibet" to "China" and the first para information from "nomadic cultures of Central Asia" to "China".

The political motivation of the edits is obvious: "Tibet is part of China, therefore 'Tibet' must be replaced with 'China'". Unfortunately this kind of aggressive political correctness isn't helpful to anyone's understanding of this breed of dog or its background. But the edits do raise a couple of questions:

1. In the info box, the wording is 'Country of origin'. The question arises as to whether Tibet is a 'country'. If 'country' is rigidly interpreted as a political unit (which it usually tends to be), then the heading is less than ideal. Would 'Place of origin', which removes the political implications, be preferable? The problem is that Tibet and its culture are historically quite different from that of "China proper" (or mainstream Chinese culture, however you want to interpret it), and it is therefore meaningful to distinguish the Tibetan origin of the dogs. It would seem to be desirable to proof the page against editors who drop by just to let us know that "Tibet is part of China" by getting rid of the troublesome word "country".

2. Tibet is not usually considered to be part of 'Central Asia' (although in some definitions it is). So the question is: did the Tibetan mastiff originate in Tibet, or did it originate in Central Asia? Or both? The article is very vague on this and other matters. Is there information available that could help clarify this? If the breed did originate in 'Central Asia' (and not just Tibet), then the info box also needs to be harmonised with the text, e.g., Place of origin: Tibet and Central Asia.

123.122.197.82 (talk) 07:57, 27 May 2012 (UTC)

Country of origin is Tibet, originating with nomadic cultures are Tibet, China, Nepal, Ladakh, and Central Asia. Therefore these countries and places should be mentioned in this article. 116.49.50.58 (talk) 16:09, 13 January 2014 (UTC)

What you mean? Old map of tibet included some India, Nepal, as well. Are we going to add "Dog breeds originated in India"? "Dog breeds originated in Nepal"? Just because they own the pieces of Tibet. Noteswork (talk) 05:23, 29 January 2014 (UTC)

The formal breed (and this article is meant to be about the formal breed) was first defined in the UK (before the FCI took over the standard), and while the breed stock used dogs from Tibet they were bred in the UK to the standard. We could then argue that country should include the UK, although it would be silly to do so. I do think expanding the article to include other countries in the body doesn't really hurt, but only if it avoids being a huge list and adds some value.

As for changing Tibet to China, that isn't really necessary. The PRC recognise the Tibetians as a separate ethnic group, and China is considered a Multinational state. Wikipedia policy for Country boxes for the UK (another Multinational state) say to let people use UK, Wales, England, Scotland or Northern Ireland and not to enforce conformity. I'd suggest that should happen here as well. FMMonty (talk) 12:17, 31 January 2014 (UTC)

Excellent. If there are no more opinions for few other days. China will be removed from category. Noteswork (talk) 13:06, 31 January 2014 (UTC)

As we all know the country of origin is Tibet, but no need to remove China from category. It's like originated in Scotland is equivalent to originated in UK. 116.49.52.206 (talk) 12:26, 6 February 2014 (UTC)

Not a "True Mastiff?"

The article states that the TM is not a true mastiff. By what definition is this statement justified? I am not saying that the TM _is_ a true mastiff, I just think there should be a solid definition of the term. 65.79.173.135 (talk) 13:20, 3 July 2014 (UTC)Will in New Haven65.79.173.135 (talk) 13:20, 3 July 2014 (UTC)

Mastiff. Hafspajen (talk) 16:17, 3 July 2014 (UTC)

Height

As indicated in the article, the height is said to be "up to 830 cm (330 in)". Factually, this is impossible as there is no land mammal that is close to 27 feet in height.

According to virtually all expert sites, the Bankhar is distinct from the Tibetan Mastiff, rather than it being an alternative/regional name for same. See http://bankhar.org/?page_id=48 Irish Melkite (talk) 19:46, 20 December 2015 (UTC)

Origin

Some Tibetans say Mongols bring this dog in Tibet. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 122.201.31.177 (talk) 01:59, 22 October 2015 (UTC)

These guys are sick about the origin and breed type there are separate type of opinions in the same article one saying it is one of mastiff type in the introduction and another paragraph (Name) saying it is not a true mastiff type. About the photo none of it is about the aboriginal type the the articles is about Tibetan Mastiff history, all the articles and photos are about modern Tibetan Mastiff. No one is allowed to write about the history about the Tibetan dog even they don’t consider the articles of Don Messerschmidt making clear about the mystery of the mastiff big as donkey as a reference Bikaash (talk) 16:08, 23 February 2021 (UTC)

Bikaash, I agree these dogs are not mastiffs and I have a sources that specifies such, the name is an English misnomer for the breed, no doubt based on their size with little regard for their actual form. This is not unique to the Tibetan Mastiff, a similar example is the Spanish Mastiff. I should be able to introduce something this evening. Cavalryman (talk) 01:52, 24 February 2021 (UTC).