Talk:Nonius horse/GA1
GA Review edit
| GA toolbox |
|---|
| Reviewing |
Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch
Reviewer: Vinethemonkey (talk · contribs) 05:05, 27 March 2014 (UTC) Hello, and I am Vinethemonkey. Let's get started here!
Length of article edit
Although it is descriptive, I see that it is very short. I recommend extending it further (if there are any good articles that are short, tell me and I'll take back my word).
References edit
Not concerning the shortness of the article, but rather the length of it and its match, I say it is reasonably well matched for the number of it. It is believable.
Pictures edit
Considering the length and its match, I say it is good enough. Just saying, though, if you could put in some more pictures, that would be awesome.
Neutrality edit
I say it is neutral, and well matched.
Grammar edit
It is good.
Decision edit
I will need a second opinion of this. I am a little stumped by the shortness of the article. Other then that, everything else is good.
- Vinethemoney, thanks for the review, and I don't mean to be rude, but are you sure that you have read and understand the WP:Good article criteria? There are a couple of the things you mention above that make me think that perhaps a more thorough reading of the criteria would be beneficial. First, length is not a GA criteria - broadness is, and there are many GAs that are shorter than this one (I've written a number of sub-10kb articles that have become GAs with no problems, and I know others have as well). If you can see something major about the topic that is not mentioned in the article, or if there are spots that make you go "what? I don't understand this...it needs to be explained better/more completely/with more background or context/whatever", then that is where the focus should be.
- With regard to images, images are not a requirement for GA status, although it is required that any images used have proper licensing. This article uses all of the images that are available in the Commons category for the breed. However, if you have suggestions of specific images that you think would be useful, please let me know and I would be happy to take a look at them. Again, I apologize if this comes off as rude, but it is necessary for reviewers to be well educated in the criteria of GA, in order to properly apply them while reviewing. I believe there is a mentorship program at GAN for new reviewers, or many editors start off writing GAs first, so that they can see what it is like to develop an article that meets the criteria. Thanks again for the review, Dana boomer (talk) 12:24, 27 March 2014 (UTC)
- Thank you for the clarification. As you should know, I am a reviewer in progress. Each review I do makes me better. In that case, I see this to be a good article. Your response was not rude, and I thank you for the response. Vinethemonkey (talk) 16:39, 28 March 2014 (UTC)Vinethemonkey
- Thank you! Good luck with your future reviewing! Dana boomer (talk) 17:12, 28 March 2014 (UTC)