Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 20:32, 6 February 2008

 GA on hold — Notes left on talk page.. Template:WikiProject Horse breeds

Recent edits and citation format

Per the edit history of this article over the past week, I did a little cleanup, keeping what appeared to be the best of some of the word tweaks and new material. Cleaned up and expanded the controversies section, tossed a possibly dubious statement that had been fact tagged for quite a while, other assorted bits and pieces.

Comment on citations to avoid future edit wars: Overall, wikipedia guidelines prefer footnotes to inline citations, and overall it's best to follow them here. However, for the purpose of links to photographs, given that wikipedia itself has few examples but we want an illustration, I am OK with the inline links at those places only. It's a little awkward to have both forms, but if we consider the inlink links a stopgap measure until wikimedia commons has actual photos we can insert into the article, it works for me.

Oh, and all you Appy people, get out those digital cameras and start snapping photos of striped, hooves, mottled skin, etc... Misplaced Pages needs your help! (smile) See Commons--upload file for more info. Montanabw 03:07, 11 September 2007 (UTC)

GA pre-pre review

• Lede. WAYYY short. We want two or three hefty paragraphs here.
• Citations. Lots of them. For this size I'd expect at least twice this many.
• Gotta get rid of the external links inside the text of the article. GA will shoot you down asap for that.
• Popular culture. GA hates these, but you can do them if they are bigger than this one. And you left off John Wayne's black appy that's in a couple of films with him! Might also mention the appy son of Secretariat.
• Consider starting a ApHC article and move some of that stuff over there. It'll look neater and you can prune some of the external links over there too.
• Try to expand the first two subsections of the History section. Or combine them. Right now they are so short, they overpower the Nez Perce sections and make them look too big
• Consider an "influences on other breeds" or "influences from other breeds" section.
• Uses section. Also explain the costume class they used to have.
• Im pretty sure the license plate is wrongly tagged on Commons. The tag that is on it only applies to the Federal gov, and the plate is from a state gov.
• If the weather ever gets warm AND sunny here, I'll trek to the stable and take some shots. Couple of appys there.

I'm just dead dog tired tonight. I'll try to throw some fact tags at places and throw some citations up tomorrow. And comb over this more thoroughly. It's not that far off, honestly. Clean up clean up clean up. That's the main thing.Ealdgyth | Talk 04:55, 30 January 2008 (UTC)

OK, get a good night's sleep! What's your position on footnotes in the lead section, and to what extent do you recommend "parroting" info that appears later on? (i.e. taking the first sentence of various sections almost verbatim...Intros are the bane of my existence) Montanabw 05:54, 30 January 2008 (UTC)

I have good luck with taking a sentence from most every paragraph, although it may not be the first sentence. Sometimes I'll chose a particularly juicy piece to put up top. Of course, most of my GAs have been medieval bishops, so juicy is relative. I usually write the lede shortly before i submit to GA. I only footnote direct quotations, and have only had one (out of ten) GA's request a footnote for anything but a quotation in the lede. Thick ledes get you brownie points, when I review. I think 7/8s of the review's I've done have had to have the lede bulked up. They aren't just the bane of your existence. Ealdgyth | Talk 05:58, 30 January 2008 (UTC)

There is an ApHC article already started. It had been wikilinked farther down the article, but I also wikilinked it when it's first mentioned in the history section. I'm not totally sure what information should be moved over there, but just putting it out there that it does exist. Also, since GA's seem to prohibit in-text photo links, is it allright that I go through and take them all out? Montana, I know you said on your talk page that there'd been an argument over them...but if we want GA? Dana boomer (talk) 13:59, 30 January 2008 (UTC)

I'd think the external links to the ApHC affliates would be good over on the ApHC article. Maybe the ApHC site itself too, but that's not quite so big a deal. Also the details on the registration should probably go with the ApHC article, with a cross link to the breed article. Ealdgyth | Talk 14:59, 30 January 2008 (UTC)

I'm up and going to look over and see what might need fact tags now... don't freak Dana, I'm known for being a pain about things needing fact tags. If it moves, I want it cited! Ealdgyth | Talk 14:46, 30 January 2008 (UTC)

More stuff:

• The "Spotted horse in America" subsection, the last sentence says "Each theory has some historical support." We can expand on that, I hope. A brief statement that about who supports each side and expanding on that wouldn't hurt pad the article out. As it is now it looks skimpy.
• If we do an influence section, definitely mention the POA being developed from the Appy. Isn't there an Appy Sport horse registry? And the AraAppaloosa?

More as I think of it. Ealdgyth | Talk 14:59, 30 January 2008 (UTC)

Okies, found some articles and my whopping two books on the Appy. I'll try to get some of this stuff into the article this evening. Gotta go run errands first. Whee. Ealdgyth | Talk 20:52, 30 January 2008 (UTC)

And entered. Added some data. There is a GREAT shot of an Appy in a pre-WWI circus tent for the Barnun & Bailey folks that I'll try to scan in soon, as well as a great one of the same time frame in a Roman standing circus act. Ealdgyth | Talk 00:48, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

Allright, all in-text photo links are gone (I think, unless I missed one, which is always possible). Also, the registration and external links sections have been fairly well pruned through removal of information to the ApHC article (and the two articles are cross linked). Tomorrow I'll probably work on extrapolating a uses section from all of the various uses mentioned, as well as taking as stab at the lead. Depends on how busy work is as far as how much of this I actually get done! Looking forward to seeing the pics, Ealdgyth... Dana boomer (talk) 03:07, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

errp! That means I actually have to do it, huh? I do think I've mined out my books. I do think we should mention the various classes in shows that the ApHC runs that aren't in other breed shows. As I recall they are the keyhole and the costume class, and some others? Ealdgyth | Talk 03:18, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

Overall, I like what is happening. I am going to restore the national links, though, because we can hold the line on national organizations (there won't be many) but when there is just one group, then a) All the state clubs start adding their sites, which is an ongoing PITA, and b) the people in other countries start ranting at us for being "American-centric." So letting the clubs in other nations stay seems to, paradoxically, keep down the number of minor club links. I will source the Lewis and Clark quote directly (the actual source was the appy club page, but it IS in the journals, just have to find a set to verify off of), will maybe tweak some other things with appropriate edit summaries to explain what I'm up to. If you guys aren't thrilled, just tweak away. Oh, and on the breeds thing, that is going to be tricky, as you may have noticed, there is a debate over when something is a new "breed" and when it's a marketing ploy for someone's farm. (And why the AraAppaloosa exists is beyond me because ApHC lets in half-Arabs, but oh well...somebody got in a fight with somebody else and took all their marbles to start their own club, I guess.). However, the POA is a definite breed, we need to take a REAL careful look at the rest, which include the Ranger Horse, the Tiger Horse, the "Spanish Jennet Horse" (see that discussion), the Walkaloosa, and god knows what else. There is a part of me that really asks which of these need promotion and which the Appy people wish would just go away...oh yes, and the Nez Perce horse is mentioned in the article, in passing (why people want to cross an Akhal-Teke on an Appy is beyond me, isn't that like crossing a border collie on a coyote = smart AND evil?(grin) I mean, I KNOW someone who has an Appy-Mustang cross and if that horse had an opposable thumb it would take over the planet! ). Anyway, this one is looking like a fun project, though I dread that onslaught that comes with GA nominations... Montanabw 03:55, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

Ranger horse is easy. They trace to Linden Tree and err.. Leopard that President Grant got. Arabians from the desert. That's where the Robards' horses got their spots, one of his foundation dams traced to them, I believe. I'll have to dig... it's somewhere. Whether it's actually sourceable to Misplaced Pages, is another story. It's part of the "QH history files" and very well may be an original letter or communication to me from someone. Ealdgyth | Talk 04:01, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

Hm.. nope. Same source though. Joker B's dam was Blue Vitrol, who was out of Leopard who was out of a mare by Primero. That Primero daughter's dam was a mare by "Arab" who I think I figured out was "Barnum's Arab" and may possibly be the Leopard that was Grant's. Leopard's certainly quite the suggestive name anyway... Ealdgyth | Talk 04:29, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

Ironically, given Arabian genetics, "Leopard" may have been either a sabino horse or a majorly fleabitten gray! LOL! (Somewhere I think I did read that he was a gray...) Montanabw 06:54, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

One was supposed to be a Barb, the other was an Arabian. I'm for bed! Ealdgyth | Talk 06:58, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, but Barbs didn't have the Leopard gene, either! (LOL). And actually, Leopard WAS an Arab, he has offspring in the AHA studbook (via Anazeh) Linden Tree, though, who knows?? Sources are all over the place on some of this stuff.

I've found a citation for the last fact tag in the article, so all of those are now gone!!!! I think we've covered all of Ealdgyth's suggestions, except maybe that the first two history sections and the appys in film section are still fairly short. Should we do more to expand these, or perhaps combine the history sections? I think we need to be careful about the film section, as it could easily turn into a listing of every B-list movie that's ever had a spotted horse mentioned, but at the moment it's just...short. Other than this, are we about ready for GA review? Dana boomer (talk) 18:33, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

I took out some more lurking links in the text. We need to standardise the references Misplaced Pages:Citing sources and all that. Misplaced Pages:Citation templates is probably the easiest, as it formats the silly things for you. I think we really should expand those sections a bit. I've still got the pictures to scan too. Ealdgyth | Talk 20:05, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

GA pre-review

Starting a new header to make the discussion easier to follow. I really see no harm in a short popular culture section as is (maybe if some famous person owns appys like how William Shatner is into Saddlebreds, we could add that in, or if Appys are sports mascots, like the gray horses all named Traveler (mascot) are for for USC, etc. I agree we don't have to list every B western. But I will make it a subheading of "uses" because, really, that's what this is all about. (The uses section could be expanded a bit, I suppose, but it was 1am last night when I tweaked it and my enthusiasm was limited. I hate the ref template, I know eventually I have to care, but that hasn't stopped an article from going GA yet, even the horribly anal-retentive review I endured over at Arabian horse didn't hammer on the citation format (for FA it will matter, I suppose, can't hure to improve cites, but I don't see it as a priority).

Well, I just got hammered for it on one of mine, so I'll be glad to go through and clean them up shortly. The other thing we kinda have to do is really go through the prose with a fine tooth comb. No contractions, watch for "however" at the start of sentences, etc. etc. I also ran across a reference in one of the articles to some folks that contest the history of the breed? I don't have anything more than that, sorry. But was there some sort of controversy over Francis Haines' research work at one point? When I go through the references and get them standardized, I'll also check that the web sites are 'reliable'. Ealdgyth | Talk 22:21, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

Oh, ouch. Some of this stuff is so "college kid term paper" but then, I think that encompasesses half the admins and 75% of the GA reviewers. However, it is actually acceptable to begin a sentence with "however." (grin) Nonetheless, the more officially grammatical method is the use of a semicolon; however, this has started any number of minor punctuation edit wars. LOL!! BTW, one of these days when I get to it, I'll find a page cite from the Bennett book.

And yeah, spotted some grammar problems and contractions myself, just sort of try and grab a few more every trip through. Not sure which ref has the questioning of history, but tip me off and I'll analyze it and be the bad cop if needed. God knows I "teach the controversy" in these articles often enough, however, if it's like the flat earth theory, I feel no obligation to include it. Fact-checkin' iz me! Montanabw 04:15, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

Hey, now. *I* do lots of GA reviews. Yeah, it's a pain, but it should be at least a bit more formal than conversation. I don't usually get too bent out of shape over the prose, but I dislike short paragraphs. They make things hard to read if there are a lot of one and two sentence paragraphs. Contractions are a big one for a lot of folks. None of the refs in the article question the history, it's in an article I have in my files. It wasn't the topic of the article, it was mentioned in passing. Ealdgyth | Talk 04:25, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

Citations

Are switched to the templates. Blech. Disturb them at your peril.Ealdgyth | Talk 02:08, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

I just owe you a beer for that or something. I promise not to screw up anything you did, though I still might screw up my own edits (But I have a userbox for that, so everyone has been warned! Montanabw 04:07, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

I'm guessing you liked the pictures. But none of striped hooves are going to be coming from here, we're snowing, and due to get up to a foot. BLECH! Ealdgyth | Talk 04:11, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

Wuss. We only have about 6 inches of snow here at the moment, but two nights ago it got down to -20 below here! LOL! Actually is snowing again, hope we don't get a foot, but we DO need the moisture. I'm thinking for striped hooves, we could go on a hunt in Flickr or something and look to see if anyone has a free photo to crop (that's how I found the Appy eye one). Montanabw 04:17, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

NOt that I'm scared of the snow, but it's hard to take pictures of hooves when they are not visible in the snow. And the barn is too dark for photographs. So.. we wait. Ealdgyth | Talk 04:22, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

I tried to shoot a photo of an ermine spot on one of my horses' legs, in the dark, in the barn, after she had stepped in poop, got back in the house looked at what I got, said "to heck with it" and went hunting in commons for leg photos. Found a good one there! LOL! Montanabw 04:38, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

GA push

I think we're getting close. A bit more expansion, and then I suggest we leave it sit for a couple of days, and then everyone go through it with a fine toothed comb, find all the weirdly phrased sentences, etc. And do a last pass through to make sure we're not overlinking things, and make sure the lead is a good summary.Ealdgyth | Talk 04:34, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

Feel free to tweak the lead, I did a bit on it yesterday, but really ran out of gas about saying more without getting into too many details (I personally am a fan of a short lead, but no more than about 3 paras, but that's just me), the lead needs someone who didn't write so much of the content to do it, I think. What else do you think needs to be expanded? My creativity is sort of at a low ebb (had a brushfire today because I raced in on a good faith edit but was too snarky, but the edit needed help and it still was a couple of hours' work) I really don't feel much more needs be added to the ancient history section, I made it sort of the intro to the whole history piece, as that European history chunk would also be true of the Knabstrup and other leopard breeds, thus is "generic" to the Lp gene. I'm open to other ideas, though. Montanabw 04:44, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

Let me sleep on it. It's not like I'm going anywhere tomorrow or anything (grins). Ealdgyth | Talk 04:56, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

I've had a good read of the article following Montanabw's invitation, and would like to say that it looks really good. It's easy to read and seems comprehensive. So my suggestions now might seem a bit picky, but I offer them for what they're worth.

1. I noticed the repetition of "one parent with Lp gene" in the first sentence of two sections (genetics & colour registration). They had different refs, too
2. Appaloosa#Influence on other breeds seems quite short for its own section, and there's no ref for the final comment
3. Lead paragraph is quite deep and hits a newcomer (well me, anyway) a bit hard; perhaps it says too much, rather than leads in more generally? It's a tricky one: people have different likes; I've met those who hate refs etc there.
4. Our reviewer at Horses in the Middle Ages suggested having notes (eg. Bennet, p 4) and then a list of references; personally, I think yours are quite clear, esp as so many are online, but your reviewer might be the same
5. there's lots of external links, which at first glance just seems a list of clubs but I understand the rationale given. keeping to national ones is a good idea.

Anyway, that's what occurs to me on a first look. Hope it's helpful. Gwinva (talk) 01:07, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

I'm taking it up. GA Reviewers usually find something to work on, and I think we are close enough, anything flagged should be something I can hit within 24 hours, or anyone else here can jump in too. I'll look over the Bennett cites a bit and see if there are tweaks there. Good Articles need not be perfect articles. Montanabw 01:00, 6 February 2008 (UTC)

GA review notes

OK, I'll post things up as I find them: cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 19:30, 6 February 2008 (UTC)

• The Appaloosa is a horse breed with preferred characteristics that include coat pattern. It is best known for its leopard spotted coat color and other distinctive physical characteristics, created by the "Lp" or "leopard" gene complex. - sits oddly with me, just sorta leaps into things. I'd change to:

The Appaloosa is a horse breed known for its leopard spotted coat color and other distinctive physical characteristics, with the "Lp" or "leopard" gene complex responsible for preferred characteristics that include coat pattern. - or something like it.

..moved into modern times with - umm, colloquial. Just remove it and rephrase with the org formed in 1938. cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 19:32, 6 February 2008 (UTC)

I'd just remove the subheading bit Spotted horses in the Americas and combine the two short sections. cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 19:36, 6 February 2008 (UTC)

You need to minimise the use of phrases like 'Some scholars/archaeologists/historians believe' bits. I trimmed stuff at the beginning of Spotted horses in the Americas as an example. The vague extra words weren't adding anything to the materialcheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 19:40, 6 February 2008 (UTC)

the Appaloosa as a breed had caught the eye of the general public.. - bolded bit is redundant. If you remove it the sentence still keeps its meaning. cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 19:49, 6 February 2008 (UTC)

A significant crossbreeding influence used to revitalize the Appaloosa was the Arabian horse, - ungainly. How about "Appaloosas were crossbred with Arabians to revitalize.." or something. Also need to expain why they wer chosen. typiness? health? etc. cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 19:54, 6 February 2008 (UTC)

• Use bold rather than caps lock in Color and spotting patterns. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Casliber (talk • contribs) 20:17, 6 February 2008 (UTC)

Taken care of Ealdgyth | Talk 20:32, 6 February 2008 (UTC)

• The Controversy section is cobbled together and artificial. Health issues should be its own section and any other information can be added to it would be helpful. The Color and registration controversy needs to be a subsection of registration as that is what it pertains to. Not sure what it should be called though. Drug rules should be under a subsection of showing somewhere near registration. Come to think of it, there is no mention of annual shows etc. in the article -needs one (prizes/awards etc.)

• In terms of comprehensiveness, as it stands it has a US focus. We have appaloosas here in Australia, and some mention needs to be made of their status/numbers/societies and any differences in the rest of the world.

To summarise, you've done a good job with the flow of the prose, it needs some copyediting (some of which I've done already and noted some more stuff to do above). Beagle is a good example of a breed article to aim for which is a current FA.