Shows a near-ideal full-grown animal of the breed in a good position. Geocoding not added because it would have been the animal's home farm, which I feel would be too invasive to the owners' privacy. -- Pitke (talk)
Question Could you please recommend a serious online reference giving the characteristics of that breed? The fr:WP article is a stub without many content, but it says that "Thumbelina" is an American miniature horse; however, we don't find the photos of Thumbelina in the Commons category Category:American Miniature Horse. On the contrary, the other image in that category illustrates for instance the fr:WP article on Falabella, which seems another breed. On :en:WP, there isn't an article precisely related to "American miniature horse", but simply to Miniature horse in general. --Myrabella (talk) 18:55, 25 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
InfoThumbelina appears to have dwarfism, so she should only illustrate herself or horse dwarfism. I've replaced her at a few articles. The fr article's cite for the breed info is dead so I can't check it, and it's hard to find information about her breed as apparently she was never registered, and Americans don't seem to think horses to be born as some breed, but becoming such with registration. I've tried to find her parent's info but haven't been able to get even names. It's also possible that because her family was miniature (maybe not even registered as anything), and because she is American, someone has made the assumption that she is an AMHA horse, American Miniature Horse, instead of an American miniature horse which she is, being miniature (by parentage) and American (by place of breeding). Also, it's common to use the breed name Falabella as a misnomer synonym for any mini horse. As for the breed standard, The official AMHA breed standard seems to encourage a mostly Arabian-type miniature (level topline, wide forehead, large eyes, straight or slightly concave profile, longish neck etc). Their "colors" section is seriously messed up. --Pitke (talk) 10:06, 26 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Thank you. According to AMHA breed standard, the size is a criterion of the most importance([1] ). How can we be sure that the nominated specimen doesn't measure more than 34 inches at the withers? I suggest to add an info about his AMHA registration in the description (I've found that ; note that the other image in the category brings this kind of info). I wonder if there are other true "American Miniature Horses" in the mother Category:Miniature horses, would you be kind enough to check? --Myrabella (talk) 11:49, 26 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Info the link you posted features the horse's two registry numbers, meaning he's accepted, meaning he fulfils the size requirements. Also, there's a show picture of him that shows he's been in "National Top Ten", which gives more relation on the topic of his quality. I've been trying to categorise the mini horse pictures (as well as all the other horse pictures) as thoroughly as possible, but sadly enough many pictures lack any name or breed information. In the lack of central breed registries with open-access databases, even the full name of a horse might not be enough to investigate the matter better. --Pitke (talk) 18:29, 26 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Description completed, please check. Note : the EXIF don't match with the date given in the description. + Question : Is he roan or buckskin ? The image has the 2 categories, that seems excessive... --Myrabella (talk) 19:18, 26 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Description is ok. And if you ask me, he does seem a roan buckskin, a colouration too rare (for now) to create a new category for. While buckskins can be very pale at times - even individuals that at other times of year could be golden tan - they seem to always retain some yellow in their heads, and their body, rather than a cold greyish white, is a slightly warm tone. "Charming's" body is a cool tone to my eyes. Moreover, clear soot patches at his underneck and head as well as spine and crest of neck should be "clearer", now they seem to be mixed with white. Especially the area around his jaws calls "roan" for me. His sire is a registered and recognisable bay roan too, so the genetic possibility for roan exists. If he really is buckskin roan, he is a bay, with homozygous Creme factor rendering him a buckskin (homozygous would be Category:Perlino), and the Rn factor adding the roan pattern of intermixed white hairs. Two colour categories for a horse is really not a big issue, this buddy could easily score "Chestnut horses", "Varnish roan", "Tobiano", and "Sabino horses"; this one on the other hand is genetically black, but Dun and Silver factors make him pale ashen with whitish mane, and the Tobiano pattern adds to the brew too. --Pitke (talk) 19:48, 26 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for these detailed explanations. He seems less grey, more golden—let's say more plainly buckskin—on the photos of the breeder's website; the nominated image may have a color balance issue, but this point isn't of the highest importance for the scope. --Myrabella (talk) 12:17, 27 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Support This image of an American Miniature Horse with pedigree and registration is the best picture available in the related category. The claim for a geotag exemption is acceptable IMO. Assuming that this image really depicts the stallion known under those references (see my last comment above about his color), it is the most valuable for the scope to me and fulfills all criteria. --Myrabella (talk) 12:17, 27 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
