Talk:Poitevin horse/GA1

GA Review

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

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

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?

• "Proved" sounds extremely odd to my ear - must be a AE/BE thing. To avoid this, I've changed it to "verified" :) Dana boomer (talk) 00:49, 14 April 2013 (UTC)

• 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)

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)

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)

• 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)

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)

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)

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)

Thank you very much for another great review, Jim! Dana boomer (talk) 11:49, 14 April 2013 (UTC)

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: