Talk:Namib Desert Horse/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: FunkMonk (talk · contribs) 17:34, 27 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Been reviewing quite a few horse articles now, but couldn't resist this one too! FunkMonk (talk) 17:34, 27 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
There seem to be quite a few nice unused images on Flickr[1] that we have plenty of room for here. FunkMonk (talk) 17:36, 27 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Uploaded and added two more images of the horses, plus an image of their main predator. Dana boomer (talk) 14:53, 31 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I think something like this[2] would be better for the infobox (or at least somewhere, it is a good one). You can hardly make them out on the present photo. FunkMonk (talk) 17:40, 31 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Uploaded and switched out. Dana boomer (talk) 21:14, 2 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

"many of German descent" Seems weird to say this for a horse.

Tweaked. Dana boomer (talk) 14:53, 31 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

It seems the second paragraph under characteristics could be its own section or subsection, behaviour/ecology or some such.

Done, plus a bit of copyediting. Dana boomer (talk) 14:53, 31 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

"clean limbed" What is that?

Linked to wikt:clean-limbed. Basically, slender and well-proportioned. Dana boomer (talk) 14:53, 31 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

"they have good conformation" Likewise.

Linked to equine conformation. Dana boomer (talk) 14:53, 31 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Nice, more to come! FunkMonk (talk) 16:48, 31 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
"The horses tend to remain in above average condition, despite the harsh environment in which they live, with stallions generally averaging better condition then mares." What does "good condition" entail?

I've added in a description of the basic scale which the observing scientists use. Better? Dana boomer (talk) 20:52, 2 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

"During severe droughts, average condition decreases, but even then horses are found in moderate condition and the entire population is never in very poor condition." The word condition is used three times in one sentence, any way to reduce?

Rewrote a bit, any better? It's still a bit repetitive, but I'm not sure how to make it much better. Any suggestions? Dana boomer (talk) 20:52, 2 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Are there zebras where they live? Any interaction? Since the quagga is extinct from South Africa, there would be ecological room for these horses?

No, although there are some to the north. I've added in a bit on this. Dana boomer (talk) 20:52, 2 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

"However, though the horses have a genetic similarity to Arabian-type horses, they do not closely resemble them in outward appearance." Why, due to fast adaptation or some such?

I've re-written and expanded this section a bit. The study hadn't really been properly summarized, so it should read more clearly now. This was originally written by another user, and was the only section I didn't check closely before nominating for GAN - that'll teach me... Dana boomer (talk) 20:52, 2 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

"Photo albums from the stud show animals with distinctive characteristics still seen in the Namib Desert Horse of today." Like what?

Tweaked. Dana boomer (talk) 21:14, 2 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

"Due to the lack of affect on vegetation by horses, it is unlikely that they significantly influence small mammal populations. The horses also appear to have no measurable affect" Affect or effect?

According to my closest style guide, affect is a verb meaning to "have an influence on", while effect is a noun meaning "a change that is the result of something". So, I think I have it right (in that both usages could be replaced by the word "influence"), but this is always the word pair that screws me up, so I could be wrong. Dana boomer (talk) 21:14, 2 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure myself, but struck me as odd. But I'm not a native English speaker. Well, let's leave that for the FA! FunkMonk (talk) 21:34, 2 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Why is the book under further reading not used as a source?

Because I haven't managed to get my hands on it yet. I'm hoping I can get it through ILL, and I'll definitely need to see it before I take the article to FAC, which I'd like to do. However, given that the main author is the author of the 200+ page PhD thesis that is currently a major source for the article, I don't think it will contain any significant additions to the article. The only thing I would guess at is updates to the population, but as far as I can tell, it's mainly a public-accessible book form of Greyling's PhD thesis, possibly with a few updates. Dana boomer (talk) 20:52, 2 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

All looks good, I'll promote! FunkMonk (talk) 21:34, 2 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]