Most of the faults you list for a breed Jill apply to EVERY breed and all dogs in general. Vicious is a fault in all breeds, if you use it for one breed you should use it for all. In the AmStaff listing, you say that "powerful jaw and body strength can inflict horrible wounds" but you don't say the same thing about similarly sized breeds, even those that originated as guard dogs. Also, you really need to clarify on faults, your site isn't consistant in the least. With some breeds the characteristics aren't seperated, the list just runs on with no notation of it being a fault. The way it is set up is confusing and makes it sound to the lay person that EVERY example of that breed has that trait. Some breeds don't even have faults listed. MeiMei's suggestion regarding phrasing was excellent.
I think the main reason that the guide hasn't been mentioned is who would be comfortable taking advice from someone that does barely any research, just skims the surface and allows falsehood myths to be perpetuated as truth? In some cases the spelling of the breed name isn't even right. For a site that uses the title "dogs in depth" it is quite the opposite. For as minimal as the breed descriptions are, I have a very hard time believing that there was 20 minutes of research done on them, much less 20 hours. But if you want us to talk about the guide.........
I found at least a couple grammatical errors and some sentances that flat out just don't make sense. There are also a few other things I take issue with:
[quote]Consider how you might obtain one.
Wherever, inspect the premises for cleanliness. If you cannot travel to the location of the litter and inspect the premises, ask for references and contact them regarding the breeder/rescue/store.[/quote]
This is the first sentence pertaining to the obtaining of a dog. You have the word store listed. Further down, you list pet stores and commercial breeders as a viable place to get a dog. Those are places that should be avoided at ALL costs. Puppymills, or commercial breeders as you say, are horrible places that should not be supported by anyone.
Under rescues in the guide, you don't mention that as an offshoot of being in a rescue that the dogs are already spayed/neutered and vetted. Many times they also have some basic training down. I would elaborate more in your descriptions.
Under small kennels, you reccommend that people try to meet the parents of thier pup. That's great in theory, but most small kennels/breeders don't breed thier own dogs together, instead they find a dog that best suits thier dogs traits. Meeting both parents is sometimes not possible because of that. If the breeder does have both dogs, I would be somewhat suspicious. Generally, those who have both parents are backyard breeders and are not doing anything to better the breed. You also don't have a list of questions to ask the breeder, you only suggest asking how long they have been breeding that particular breed and there are WAY more questions that should be asked. You say that a good way to get a referral for a good breeder is to ask a rescue org. reccommended by a national breed club. Huh? I don't know of any rescue that gives breeder referrals. Logically that should read: To find a reputable breeder find one reccommended by the national breed club. Is that what you meant?
When you list off the breed groups, you list nonsporting as : "miscellaneous category, just not like the others"
It really sounds like you didn't put any thought into that listing. Yes, the nonsporting group is a sort of catchall, but your phrasing is extremely vague. It would be better to describe it as a varied group of dogs that don't nessisarily fit into the other categories.
You may have seen the aftermath of dog bites etc, but since your site is billed as encylopedia/reference and not as a personal home page, shouldn't you be offering information in an objective manner?
Oh and Dalmatian is still misspelled on your A-Z list.