Talk:Doga (yoga)/GA1

GA Review

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch

Reviewer: Lee Vilenski (talk · contribs) 08:03, 9 October 2019 (UTC)

Hello, I am planning on reviewing this article for GA Status, over the next couple of days. Thank you for nominating the article for GA status. I hope I will learn some new information, and that my feedback is helpful.

If nominators or editors could refrain from updating the particular section that I am updating until it is complete, I would appreciate it to remove a edit conflict. Please address concerns in the section that has been completed above (If I've raised concerns up to references, feel free to comment on things like the lede.)

I generally provide an overview of things I read through the article on a first glance. Then do a thorough sweep of the article after the feedback is addressed. After this, I will present the pass/failure. I will use strikethrough tags when concerns are met. Even if something is obvious why my concern is met, please leave a message as courtesy.

Best of luck! you can also use the {{done}} tag to state when something is addressed. Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)}

Many thanks for taking this on. To reply to your detailed intro about yourself, I generally expect to work collaboratively on GANs and to fix even apparently large perceived issues promptly. I'll work on this one at once. Chiswick Chap (talk) 08:28, 9 October 2019 (UTC)

Please let me know after the review is done, if you were happy with the review! Obviously this is regarding the article's quality, however, I want to be happy and civil to all, so let me know if I have done a good job, regardless of the article's outcome.

Immediate Failures

• It is a long way from meeting any one of the six good article criteria -  Done Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 23:14, 26 October 2019 (UTC)
• It contains copyright infringements -  Done Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 23:14, 26 October 2019 (UTC)
• It has, or needs, cleanup banners that are unquestionably still valid. These include{{cleanup}}, {{POV}}, {{unreferenced}} or large numbers of {{citation needed}}, {{clarify}}, or similar tags. (See also {{QF-tags}}). -  Done Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 23:14, 26 October 2019 (UTC)
• It is not stable due to edit warring on the page. -  Done Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 23:14, 26 October 2019 (UTC)

Gosh. I assume this is just a general reminder... I believe none of these apply here. Chiswick Chap (talk) 08:29, 9 October 2019 (UTC)

Oh, this is from the GA criteria. I use this as a checklist. Don't worry, I'll get on the review soon (this is a boilerplate, I use it for all reviews to explain what I do during reviews. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 09:11, 9 October 2019 (UTC)

Links

• no dablinks  Done Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 23:15, 26 October 2019 (UTC)
• ref two should note it's a video, and who the journalist is. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 23:16, 26 October 2019 (UTC)

Added media (text and video) to citation; journalist's name is already cited. Chiswick Chap (talk) 09:30, 27 October 2019 (UTC)

Prose

Lede

• lead section seems very short for a GAN. I feel it should at least be two paragraphs. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 23:38, 26 October 2019 (UTC)

Extended. Chiswick Chap (talk) 09:41, 27 October 2019 (UTC)

• lede should mention more on the pros too. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 23:38, 26 October 2019 (UTC)

Done. Chiswick Chap (talk) 09:41, 27 October 2019 (UTC)

• could we get some alttext? Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 23:38, 26 October 2019 (UTC)

Added. Chiswick Chap (talk) 09:32, 27 October 2019 (UTC)

Rest of article

• I have some doubts that the image has the correct information for commons. I'm not sure what the rules are on free images in this way. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 23:05, 28 October 2019 (UTC)

This is odd; it says it's a cross-wiki upload from English Wikipedia, so there should be a history, but there's no trace of the original (or the uploader to English Wikipedia), nor of any such edit. Removed the image for now. Chiswick Chap (talk) 08:32, 29 October 2019 (UTC)

• "Dogis never try to impress. they practice doga with effortlessness and compassion, self-aware but never self-conscious." - [sic] or typo? Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 23:05, 28 October 2019 (UTC)

Added.

Also "impress. they" - should this not be a capital letter? Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 08:43, 29 October 2019 (UTC)

Fixed.

• The history needs to start with a basic outline of what doga is. It should be readable without the lede section. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 23:05, 28 October 2019 (UTC)

Good point, added.

• ABC News reported that the 30-minute classes that "allow[ed] you to meditate with dogs" were "surprisingly orderly". - who from ABC? Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 23:05, 28 October 2019 (UTC)

An unattributed news item on ABC. Chiswick Chap (talk) 08:02, 29 October 2019 (UTC)

• Doga teacher Brenda Bryan writes in her 2009 book Barking Buddha that "with their innate instincts, joy in simple pleasures, and soulful eyes, dogs also are seemingly enlightened beings—Barking Buddhas, if you will", and can "teach us about life and love".[1] - feels out of place. Should be later Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 23:05, 28 October 2019 (UTC)

Moved.

• Doga was brought to Britain - try the United Kingdom. Britain is a weird word to use without having said it in full before this. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 23:05, 28 October 2019 (UTC)

Done.

• • Could we also do something in the lede as well about this? I know you might say "came to Britain" in speech, but the title of the set of countries is Great Britain. Unless you are specifically excluding Northern Ireland, you are almost always better to say the United Kingdom. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 09:52, 29 October 2019 (UTC)

• Pet Pavilion of London - what is this? Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 23:05, 28 October 2019 (UTC)

Added gloss.

• Doga : Yoga - should there be a space on either side? Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 23:05, 28 October 2019 (UTC)

Closed up.

• There's a lot of - this Doga teacher says this... - hardly NPOV. Maybe reword this Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 23:05, 28 October 2019 (UTC)

Well, firstly the article is neutrally reporting on who claimed what, and explicitly attributing the claims to their authors, so it's precisely not taking sides or stating claims in Wikipedia's voice, which is what would be POV. Rewording would be dangerous as it would slide towards Wikipedia's voice, which is exactly what we must avoid. Secondly, it's not all reporting Doga teachers; there are journalists, anti-Doga dog trainers and charities, an independent travel writer, even a merchant bank. I think we're pretty much ok on the neutrality front.

• Doga enthusiasts have argued - this isn't encylopedic to me. Is this simply a fans perspective? Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 23:05, 28 October 2019 (UTC)

Added attributions to independent journalists, including on the New York Times.

• Maybe combine "Benefits" and "issues" into a reception like section. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 23:05, 28 October 2019 (UTC)

We could, but we don't have an excessive number of sections, the sections are each of reasonable length, and they discuss clearly defined topics.

• reflist doesn't need 26em (should just be {{reflist}}) Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 23:05, 28 October 2019 (UTC)

Done.

Notes & References

• Only on category? Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 23:06, 28 October 2019 (UTC)

Nothing wrong with that in general, but in this case I've created a new category "Yoga hybrids", defined it and populated it, not a bad thing. Chiswick Chap (talk) 07:50, 29 October 2019 (UTC)

• I have archived your references on your behalf Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 23:06, 28 October 2019 (UTC)

Many thanks.

GA Review

GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)

1. It is reasonably well written.

   a (prose, spelling, and grammar): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):

2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.

   a (reference section): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR): d (copyvio and plagiarism):

3. It is broad in its coverage.

   a (major aspects): b (focused):

4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.

   Fair representation without bias:

5. It is stable.

   No edit wars, etc.:

6. It is illustrated by images and other media, where possible and appropriate.

   a (images are tagged and non-free content have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):

7. Overall:

   Pass/Fail:

Comments

• Automated note - If you fancy returning the favour, I have outstanding GA nominations that require reviewing at WP:GAN. I'd be very grateful if you were to complete one of these, however it's definately not manditory. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)}

Absolutely. If I can find anything that even slightly borders on my region of competence, I'll give it my best shot. Chiswick Chap (talk) 08:30, 9 October 2019 (UTC)

• • Comment - I love dogs. I'm in. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 08:03, 9 October 2019 (UTC)

:) Chiswick Chap (talk) 08:30, 9 October 2019 (UTC)

Sorry about the delay on this one. I had hoped to get to it before my honeymoon, but alas no. I'll get to it asap. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 18:23, 25 October 2019 (UTC)

Done. Few issues above that need ironing out - on hold. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 23:06, 28 October 2019 (UTC)

Responded to all of them. Chiswick Chap (talk) 09:39, 29 October 2019 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.