Talk:Animal training

This  level-5 vital article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Animals Low‑importance Animal training is within the scope of WikiProject Animals, an attempt to better organize information in articles related to animals and zoology. For more information, visit the project page.AnimalsWikipedia:WikiProject AnimalsTemplate:WikiProject Animalsanimal articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. WikiProject Animals To-do: edit history watch purge Here are some Open Tasks : Copyedit: Merge: GLAM/ARKive donated texts into articles about endangered species. Improve : Tool use by non-human animals, Omnivore, Animal suicide, Sphaerium beckmani (a species in family Sphaeriidae ), Requests: Mammals: Invertebrates: Campocraspedon Fishes: Zaniolepis frenata Merge: GLAM/ARKive donated texts into articles about endangered species. Junqueira cow, Atka mackerel Nominate and vote: Article Improvement Drive, WikiProject Animals Collaboration

External Links

I added a starter external links section. I'm mostly familiar with some exotic animal and pet dog organizations. Re: Moorpark's EATM, I have no affiliation with them whatsoever, but they are very well known and one of the first recommendations you can hear from many people in the field of exotics. Santaduck 08:44, 25 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Edits to Horse and Dog Training

I would like to edit the paragraphs on Dog Training and the Horse Training including modified citations and more extensive details on training methods that can be applied to horses and dogs. Mccassell —Preceding undated comment added 14:56, 21 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

These are summary sections, the main articles are elsewhere. If you want to edit, no one will stop you, but we might revert your work if it doesn't seem suitable. You appear to be a new user, you might want to go over to the Wikipedia:Teahouse and ask for some help in how to format references, what things are proper references, and so on. Montanabw^(talk) 21:59, 21 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I understand that these are summary sections. I will be keeping these sections brief; however, I feel that it would be beneficial to add a few sentences about clicker training, operant conditioning and classical conditioning in the dog training paragraph. In the paragraph on horses, I also think it would be beneficial to add a summary (a few sentences) of the different styles of English and Western riding and then link to the main articles. Thank you for your feedback and I hope you like the changes I plan to make. Mccassell —Preceding undated comment added 14:49, 7 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Well, keep in mind that we already have equestrianism to be the catchall for the disciplines. I'm OK about talking in general about operant and classical conditioning, as that is general and highly relevant. Clicker training is used on many animals (thinking of dolphins) so maybe a section that is not animal-specific would be interesting and useful. My main concerns about getting too specific about any horse discipline (note the language in the horse training article about discipline-specific training is, deliberately, very vague) is that once we add "English and Western," then you get people wanting Dressage, eventing, jumping, hunters, reining, cutting, roping, western pleasure, etc., etc., etc., and then someone will mention that we say nothing about driving or polo, then someone else will weigh in that we are being US or Eurocentric and why don't we include, oh, maybe tent pegging or something? (Can you tell I have survived a lot of wiki editing wars? Getting twitchy...) I'd say feel free to start adding good stuff on operant conditioning, etc., and let's see how it goes! Montanabw^(talk) 17:32, 7 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I am about to make another revision the article on the section for horse training. I made sure not to get too specific about the different disciplines and recognize all the disciplines that have existing wikipedia articles. Mccassell —Preceding undated comment added 14:24, 18 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This article should only have a one-paragraph summary of the topic with a link to the main article on the subject. Montanabw^(talk) 19:20, 18 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Need to Add

• Contrast Positive punishment with Positive reinforcement training, and provide a history (including circuses). Also provide examples where these techniques are still used today.

• Background on Skinner and Operant Conditioning, and ways that modern training methods depart from strictly Skinnerian operant conditioning. Also explain why operant conditioning has largely been replaced by cognition in the study of human psychology, but only partially so in animal psychology, and especially not by animal trainers, who often call themselves "animal behaviorists".

• Add publications. For marine mammals, Karen Pryor's Don't Shoot the Dog and Ken Ramirez's textbook would be an example.

• Add more info on topics not covered: show dogs, horse racing and dressage and other show uses, training animals for hollywood, non North American examples (such as elephant Mahouts), herding/police/rescue/DEA/hunting dogs, training animals for cognition & sensory research, training FAQ for home pets, avian training specialty, tiger/lion/bear (e.g. siegfried & roy), and probably a section on various schools of guard dog training. Santaduck 08:52, 25 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Should this entry be changed from animal trainer to animal training? Compare with

, but note that the activity (verb) and the practitioner (noun) are not exactly parallel: doing animal training vs. doing corporate training the latter refers to being the subject of the activity, rather than the doer, whereas the former refers to the doer. Opting for animal training thus probably makes more consistent

Also I would opt for animal training also because the article could easily be more encyclopedically useful with technical information on the specifics of variants of the method of animal training.Santaduck 11:19, 20 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

UPDATE: moved, and all double redirects fixed

Well, I didn't get a chance to offer an opinion before all the links were changed. An animal trainer article would not, ideally, have the same information as an animal training article. The former would focus on the role of an animal trainer, the trainer's training (e.g., there are college-level programs and non-academic programs, etc.), kinds of animal trainers, and so on. However, now we don't have a good way of finding those links in the event that someone wants to actually create an article on animal trainers. (This is part of my objection, which I state periodically but nowhere that anyone would ever notice, of course, that piping things that are not synonyms means we lose the fact that there are a whole lot of links to somethign for which there likely ought to be an article on its own; also, please consider giving changes like this more than half a day to give people a chance to respond.) Elf | Talk 21:51, 20 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

For future convenience, because I think at some point we'll want to change all the piped [[animal training|animal trainer]] back: to find all links that say "animal trainer" but are now piped to animal training, see Special:Contributions/Santaduck from 20:44, 20 January 2006 to 21:04, 20 January 2006.

Finished a whole host of additional information, new sections, and resource links. Also finished moving from animal trainer to animal training.

The reorganization into various sections is tentative. I'm not an expert in dog, zoo, equestrian, avian areas, so my section titles or even their hierarchy of organizations may need to be changed by a knowledgeable expert.

I've added starter text for most of the new sections, but these are very much stubs, so that relevant experts have some text to bounce off of. Santaduck 22:06, 20 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I deleted the section on puppy training under the "Methods" heading. It was inappropriate for an encyclopedic article as it was completely out of context and this information is already covered under the dog training article.

If this guy hadn't been killed by a bear, we'd have never heard of him. I think that including him in this list diminishes more serious entries, so he should be removed. Unless, being killed by the animals you're training is sufficient, in which case this list could be increased.Bob98133 (talk) 13:11, 6 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Tried to restructure that section to put all the persons in their context, which should properly differentiate Stephan from his neighbors — now he is just an example of a certain kind of notability. --Marcinjeske (talk) 09:02, 7 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! I would like to add some more information to the definition of animal training and add some more information and citations to the section. Would that be okay? Aprilmarie124 (talk) 19:02, 27 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Go ahead. We could really use more and better sources across the article. A well-sourced definition would be a good start. --

talk) 19:37, 27 March 2013 (UTC)[reply

]

With an emphasis on "Well-sourced." These articles have an ongoing problem with

WP:FRINGE theories. I see you are a new editor and this was your first edit. However. We will help you if you would like. Montanabw^(talk) 21:49, 27 March 2013 (UTC)[reply

]

Thank you! Yes, I would like your guidance in editing it. I'll give it a shot and you can tell me what you think.Aprilmarie124 (talk) 17:21, 2 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

It is remarkable (and this may be an observation from a televised circus) that circus dogs act much like the Big Cats except for not suggesting the menace. Dogs have the power, speed, strength, agility, and intelligence of the Big Cats but no indication of menace. (Dogs are in fact dangerous predators, but they simply behave much better and are more likely to get people to back down before any trouble erupts). While the Big Cats are undeniably awesome, dogs can be played for humor. If a tiger can jump through a flaming hoop, then so can a dog which can do everything that a tiger can do except kill and eat people. Dog acts are done for laughs. (It's my suspicion that the dog act is made to remind people of the Big Cat acts, as such is done after the Big Cat acts). Oddly cats, which are for all practical purposes miniature tigers or leopards, don't do as well as dogs in acting like Big Cats. Dogs do what Big Cats do in a circus acts out of an apparent desire to do so. (Maybe they have seen the Big Cat acts and imitate what they see). Cats can refuse to do such and get away with it.Pbrower2a (talk) 01:57, 20 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]