Template:Did you know nominations/Floyd Carothers
- The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.
The result was: promoted by Hawkeye7 (talk) 08:38, 20 June 2016 (UTC)
| DYK toolbox |
|---|
Floyd Carothers
[edit]- ... that Floyd Carothers turned a plow horse into a national champion?
Created/expanded by White Arabian Filly (talk). Self-nominated at 21:11, 14 June 2016 (UTC).
What makes www.walkerswest.com a reliable source? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Quasihuman (talk • contribs) 21:45, 15 June 2016 (UTC)
- It is a site run by a professional breeding farm; as a TWHBEA member, they have access to old publications, show programs and records that are just not online or are behind paywall for non-members. I've cross-checked their info against newspapers and books multiple times and have found them to be accurate in every case but one (when they had a date wrong). They appear to be very conscientious about posting accurate information. Actually, they are far more accurate than most of the Tennessee guidebooks/history books, which often make errors when referring to horses (via wrong terminology). White Arabian Filly Neigh 21:56, 15 June 2016 (UTC)
- Comment: Having been a WP:EQUINE member for quite some time, and also having reviewed or helped with several of White Arabian Filly's articles on Tennessee Walking Horse trainers and horses, I have to concur with her; this particular site is one of the better online sources, particularly in situations where neither the registry nor related sites have much info. Hardcopy on these mid-20th century individuals is often hard to come by unless you have hoarded back issues of assorted horse magazines, many of which are now defunct and will probably never be digitized. Basically, as long as the citation is to a specific subpage of the site, I'm OK with it. Montanabw(talk) 04:52, 19 June 2016 (UTC)
New enough, long enough, no close paraphrasing, neutral, sourced, hook is short enough, sourced. Per above discussion, the key source seems reliable enough. A Google Books search [1] confirms the hook. GTG. Aymatth2 (talk) 19:59, 19 June 2016 (UTC)