Jump to content

Talk:Poitevin horse/GA1

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

GA Review

[edit]

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

Reviewer: Jimfbleak (talk · contribs) 07:27, 13 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Dana, no real problems, just some nitpicks

  • Trait mulassier — of the four possible combinations of caps and lc, this seems the least plausible
  • this has not been proven by — I'd say "proved", is proven OK in AE?
  • clergy members — clergy?
  • The head is long and strong,[9] with a convex profile;[5] the ears thick and long. — missing word?
  • Mesolithic — could indicate what time range this covers
  • through the beginning of World War I — should that be "up to" or is there something missing?
  • ateliers (workshops) — does this mean they were indoors?
  • Not as far as I know - my impression was that they were concentrated breeding centers. However, I've asked the French editor that I've been collaborating with on these articles for further information. Dana boomer (talk) 00:49, 14 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, see th fr fr:Mule poitevine article (don't exist in english) section "Les ateliers". There's a part inside and a part outside. There's few explanations in en in article Poitou donkey --Tsaag Valren (talk) 08:12, 14 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
OK, cool; thanks, Amelie. I'll probably take a look at the Poitevin mule article (there's another one I should probably translate!) and see if there's anything I can add here that will make this article more clear. Dana boomer (talk) 11:49, 14 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • became more rare — rarer?
  • By the early 1990s, population numbers fell to the lowest seen. — bit clunky
  • They are used to pull hitches for tourists — what's a hitch?
  • External links has no visible content, do you need the heading?

Jimfbleak - talk to me? 07:27, 13 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the review, Jim! I should have a chance to address these later today/this evening. Dana boomer (talk) 11:23, 13 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
OK, I think I've addressed everything above. I left a couple of replies, but for most of them I just fixed the issue. Please let me know if you have further comments. Dana boomer (talk) 00:49, 14 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I'm sure you are right about the AE/BE thing, good solution. I've only come across atelier in the context of indoor workshops, but my French is schoolboy standard, so I've no reason to doubt your interpretation. Bien, on y va Jimfbleak - talk to me? 05:47, 14 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you very much for another great review, Jim! Dana boomer (talk) 11:49, 14 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

GA review (see here for criteria)

  1. It is reasonably well written.
    a (prose): b (MoS):
  2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.
    a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):
  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, where possible and appropriate.
    a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
  7. Overall:
    Pass/Fail: