Talk:Joy (dog)/GA1

GA Review

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

Nominator: Jacob0790 (talk · contribs) 00:19, 14 April 2024 (UTC)

Reviewer: Aintabli (talk · contribs) 04:15, 27 April 2024 (UTC)

Thank you Aintabli for your time and the link to the books. Let me read them through. If any helpful information is there, I will replace the links in question. Jacob0790 (talk) 18:26, 29 April 2024 (UTC)

This is a really interesting choice for GAN. Here are some preliminary notes I made:

• Medium is not reliable, see WP:MEDIUM. Please remove it. - removed it
• I guess this link leads to a book, but there are no page numbers.- This book is only available in electronic format on the RoyalLib website, and as such, it does not have traditional page divisions. Here is the link to the full text of the book: https://royallib.com/read/lukyanova_viktoriya/poslednie_angeli_na_zemle.html#0.
• I would steer away from using news sites as sources for historical articles. I could find several books that may be used to replace such sources in this article.- Thanks. I found a few of these books very helpful.
• Please remove blog sources like this one.- removed it
• I don't find Joy (dog)#Romanov family's dogs particularly relevant. At most, it can be a passing mention, but dedicating a whole section on dogs other than Joy goes outside the scope of the article. If it has not already been mentioned there, that information can be added to the articles of the other dogs' owners.- The main point of the article is to demonstrate that the miraculous rescue of the dog was due to his stable and resilient nature, unlike other royal dogs whose fates are also mentioned in the article and might not be understood out of context.
• It will take time to get to relatively minute details, but Latin species names should be italicized (specifically Canis familiaris in the infobox).- fixed it
• Please use {{circa}} in accordance with WP:CIRCA.- fixed it
• As a final note, I was unsure about quickfailing this article, because much of the sources might be a deal-breaker and require more time to work on. Aintabli (talk) 04:15, 27 April 2024 (UTC)- Thank you Aintabli for your detailed review. Please let me know if you have more comments or questions., Jacob0790 (talk) 03:05, 5 May 2024 (UTC)