Talk:Thoroughbred breeding theories

Equine Low‑importance

	Horses portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Equine, a collaborative effort to improve Wikipedia's coverage of articles relating to horses, asses, zebras, hybrids, equine health, equine sports, etc. Please visit the project page for details or ask questions at the barn.EquineWikipedia:WikiProject EquineTemplate:WikiProject Equineequine articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Horse racing Mid‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Horse racing, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Horse racing on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Horse racingWikipedia:WikiProject Horse racingTemplate:WikiProject Horse racingHorse racing articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

There are quite a few other breeding theories that could be included here, but I hesitate to enbark upon them. There is the Vuiller Doseage system, Friedrich Becker, Cluster mares, Tesio, James Bell Robertson etc. At the end of the day Lowe is the only one that is much used and then only as a means of classify families. My personal opinion is that if these systems were successful more siblings would be good or better. Then of course there all the various recommended nicks and crosses. Mention should also be made of the Jersey Act in the GSB article, too.Cgoodwin (talk) 04:46, 5 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

If you want to toss this stuff into the article, you are more than welcome to. I have no knowledge or experience with Thoroughbred breeding lines/ideas, so I'm definitely not the one to tell you what can and can't go in. Or, if you want to do what you did in the TB article, and post your info and sources here, I can throw them into the article when I get a few spare minutes. Dana boomer (talk) 13:31, 5 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I took the liberty of wikifying the article a bit, adding a lead and section titles. These are definitely not set in stone; if this is not the direction this article needs to go in, please reword or restructure as appropriate. My feeling is that theories like the X factor and those mentioned above would all make good subcategories. Each can have pro/con sentences, particularly any theories with more fanciful origins...--Getwood (talk) 14:28, 23 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]