Talk:Jackalope/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Mr. Guye (talk · contribs) 01:51, 9 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I will be reviewing this article. --Mr. Guye (talk) 01:51, 9 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Please be aware that this is my very first WP:GA review.

@Montanabw:, @Finetooth: I apologize for taking so long to review this article; I have been doing schoolwork and etc. I hope to move a little faster now. --Mr. Guye (talk) 17:34, 26 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

No worry, no hurry. Your schoolwork is more important. Jackalope will wait. Finetooth (talk) 18:26, 26 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Preliminary

Cleanup tags: None to be too concerned about. Just some sources that require a subscription to access and apparently there is a template with duplicate arguments. Someone can fix the latter (I don't know which template it is), the former is not abnormal.

- The "subscription required" tag is actually required when we cite to such sources. (Montanabw)

Copyvio Just reword this line: The Douglas Chamber of Commerce has issued thousands of jackalope hunting licenses to which is from [1].

- Reworded. (Montanabw)

Blatant failures of the Six Criteria None.

- Finetooth is the lead editor here, but these two looked like low-hanging fruit for me to catch on his behalf, no worries if someone else reverts my fixes if they have a better solution. Montanabw ^(talk) 07:10, 14 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Mr. Guye for taking the time and trouble to review the article, and thanks Montanabw for the help with fixes. I just got home from a long errand and noticed that the process had begun. Finetooth (talk) 22:43, 14 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Lead

Can I get a source that says "jackalope" is a portmanteau of "jackrabbit" and "antelope" (or something of the sort). The claim is probably true, but I just feel more comfortable with a source on it. Actually, that whole paragraph needs sources.

I guess that should be discussed in the "Name" section. --Mr. Guye (talk) 21:17, 13 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

- I don't believe that we need a source for "portmanteau" as it is obviously a blend of two words; similarly we wouldn't need a source to establish that "wouldn't" is a contraction. The rest of that sentence is verified by the remaining two paragraphs in that section. I think that one's OK. Montanabw ^(talk) 07:10, 14 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Douglas Herrick and his brother, hunters with taxidermy skills, popularized the American jackalope in Douglas, Wyoming, in the 1930s by grafting deer antlers onto a jackrabbit carcass and selling the combination to a local hotel. Sentence seems a bit rambly. Possibly because it seems to have too many commas.
- Reworded, is that better? Montanabw ^(talk) 07:10, 14 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The phrase so-called, which appears multiple times in the article, should be avoided as an expression of doubt.
- I eliminated one instance where it was used (for jackrabbit), the other two make sense, one due to its humor ("fearsome critter") and the other because it is an inaccuate colloquialism

Name

Some of the largest herds of wild pronghorns, which are found only in western North America, are in Wyoming. The adults grow to about 3 feet (1 m) tall, weigh up to 150 pounds (68 kg), and can run at sustained speeds approaching 60 miles per hour (97 km/h) I feel like this line is in there only to promote Wyomingite pronghorns, which means not only is it WP:POV, but it is WP:OFFTOPIC as well. Is there a good reason for it?

- Yes, it's relevant because that's why these wags created the jacklope - that part of Wyoming doesn't have much else BUT pronghorns and jackrabbits! The pronghorn is a rather unique animal (pronghorn=Wyoming like kangaroo= Australia) This whole article is about a goofy invention designed to lure in tourists! LOL! Montanabw ^(talk) 23:09, 26 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The Conclusion

I am aware of the rest of the article, but I see no more clear issues that need to be fixed. --Mr. Guye (talk) 21:42, 6 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I believe that this article fulfills all the criteria, and so I declare this article a WP:GA. ✓ Pass Mr. Guye (talk) 22:09, 6 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for reviewing the article, and thanks also to User:Montanabw for GA fixes and earlier assistance and encouragement. Finetooth (talk) 22:57, 6 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]