Cloudflare fetched the original article and streamed it through HTMLRewriter to apply an entirely new visual system without rebuilding the source page.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Dogs, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles related to Canidae and commonly referred to as "dogs" and of which the domestic dog is but one of its many members, 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.DogsWikipedia:WikiProject DogsTemplate:WikiProject DogsDogs
It could possibly be me but looking at the two sections Famous Papillon owners and Papillons in pop culture there seems to be little distinction between the two. There really seems to be no need for the two different sections. Personally I would think that Historical Papillon owners and Papillons in pop culture would be a better split for the two. However this would also mean that the sections would need to be cleaned up and who is "historical" and who isn't would need to be decided. Anyone else have an opinion on this or is it just me? -- Dan9186(T • E • C) January 22, 2008 19:30 (UTC)
Latest comment: 4 months ago1 comment1 person in discussion
I might try to do some work on this page – tidy up after the page move and the redirect here of Phalène, add some more independent reliable sources, expand the text and so on. If I were to do so I would change the reference format to the list-defined system – references defined in the reference section, not in the text – and to hand-written refs (without cite templates), both changes for the sake of clarity and simplicity. I'll probably do that in a day or two if no-one minds, but will of course leave well alone if there's any objection. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 20:01, 6 March 2026 (UTC)Reply
_part_2.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}