Talk:American Cocker Spaniel/GA1

GA Review
The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.''

Reviewer: Dana boomer (talk) 00:23, 29 December 2010 (UTC)

Hello again! I'll take this one on for review as well. Comments up shortly... Dana boomer (talk) 00:23, 29 December 2010 (UTC)


 * GA review (see here for criteria)


 * 1) It is reasonably well written.
 * a (prose): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):
 * Avoid using contractions in the article mainspace. I think I got them all, so this is just a heads up for the future.
 * Make sure that the single/plural nature of your subject matches that of your verb. So, "it is a very happy breed; they are good dogs" is not correct because in the first part it is singular ("it is") while in the second part it is plural ("they are"). Again, I think I caught all of these, so this is just an FYI.
 * Thanks, I'll try to keep an eye on it in future! Miyagawa   (talk)  11:59, 1 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Types of dogs ("spaniel") should be lowercase, while individual breeds ("American Cocker Spaniel", "Newfoundland") are capitalized.
 * I think I got all the single "spaniels", while left American Cocker Spaniel, English Cocker Spaniel and Cocker Spaniel capitalized. Miyagawa   (talk)  11:59, 1 January 2011 (UTC)
 * History, "The first Cocker Spaniel registered in America was a liver and white dog named Captain, who was registered with the American Kennel Club in 1878." Registered, registered...any way to remove this repetition.
 * Changed the first registered to recorded. Miyagawa   (talk)  11:59, 1 January 2011 (UTC)
 * History, "now known as the oldest breed club". Any breed club or just dogs?
 * Corrected to "for dogs". Miyagawa   (talk)  11:59, 1 January 2011 (UTC)
 * History, "Ch. Obo was bred to Ch. Chloe II," Do we know what the "Ch." abbreviation is, or is it just the designation or a specific breeder or something else irrelevant?
 * Added wikilink to the "The conformation championship title" section of Championship (dog) which explains the abbreviation. Miyagawa   (talk)  11:59, 1 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Return to the UK, "Two judges would have confirmed the registration as an American Cocker before it was permitted by the KC." What?
 * Changed this sentence to "Two judges confirmed that the dog was an American Cocker and not an English Cocker before the Kennel Club permitted the dog to be shown." Miyagawa   (talk)  11:59, 1 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Return to the UK, "In the late '60s they were shown as a rare breed." How does showing as a rare breed differ from normal showing?
 * Changed the line, and found some more information in doing so as the Kennel Club have only recently uploaded all the catalogues from Crufts shows over the last hundred or so years. It now reads "In the 1960s they were shown as a rare breed, which meant that they did not have a show class of their own and were only to be shown in variety classes. This included Aramingo Argonaught, who was the first American Cocker Spaniel to be shown at Crufts in 1960 in a class entitled "Any variety not classified at this show"." Miyagawa   (talk)  11:59, 1 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Appearance, "well-pronounced stop," What's a stop?
 * Added a wikilink to the Stop section on Canine terminology. Miyagawa   (talk)  11:59, 1 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Temperament, "resulting in certain attributes which no longer make it the ideal working dog." Such as?
 * Changed the line to "It was bred more and more in conformation with the breed standard, resulting in certain attributes, such as a long coat, which no longer make it an ideal working dog." Miyagawa   (talk)  12:23, 1 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Health, "American Cockers are easy to breed," Why are they easy to breed? Easy to breed compared to what?
 * I re-read the reference and changed it to "American Cockers are relatively easy to breed compared to other dog breeds, and this combined with their previously high popularity resulted in the breed frequently being bred by backyard breeders or in puppy mills." Miyagawa   (talk)  12:23, 1 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Yes, but why are they easier to breed? More puppies? Less birthing problems? Lower puppy mortality?
 * Health, "increased the proliferation of certain health issues in non-pedigree lines." Which issues? What do you mean by "non-pedigree lines"? Not registered, or just not the best bloodlines?
 * Changed to "This indiscriminate breeding has increased the proliferation of breed related health issues in certain bloodlines." Essentially dogs from puppy mills are a lot more unhealthy than those whose breeding are planned. These days breeders will plan out breeding to eliminate health issues as well as breed in specific characteristics into the dogs whereas with puppy mills its all about numbers, with health issues often arising from inbreeding. Miyagawa   (talk)  12:23, 1 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Health, "for all dogs that are bred." Does this mean all dogs used for breeding or just all dogs after they are born?
 * Changed to "The American Spaniel Club recommends annual eye exams by a veterinary ophthalmologist for all dogs that are to be used for breeding" Miyagawa   (talk)  12:23, 1 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Health, "Both conditions appear to be inheritable." Is this just a guess or has research been done on it?
 * Changed to "Initial research shows that both conditions appear to be inheritable.". Work on Rage Syndrome is a lot more advanced in English Springer Spaniels. Miyagawa   (talk)  12:23, 1 January 2011 (UTC)
 * 1) It is factually accurate and verifiable.
 * a (references): b (citations to reliable sources):  c (OR):
 * 1) It is broad in its coverage.
 * a (major aspects): b (focused):
 * See a few of the comments in the prose section above, discussing places where a bit more elaboration is needed.
 * 1) It follows the neutral point of view policy.
 * Fair representation without bias:
 * 1) It is stable.
 * No edit wars, etc.:
 * 1) 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):
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass/Fail:
 * a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass/Fail:
 * Pass/Fail:

A bit of work needed on the prose, and a few places where a bit more elaboration is needed. However, it's overall a nice article, and shouldn't take too much work to get it up to speed. Let me know if you have any questions, Dana boomer (talk) 01:08, 29 December 2010 (UTC)
 * It looks good, and sorry for taking a couple of days to reply to this! I've made one reply above on something that I feel needs a bit more expansion. However, I don't think that one issue is at odds with the GA criteria, so I am passing the article to GA status. Nice work! Dana boomer (talk) 14:15, 3 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the review, I've removed the breeding line in the end as after a further search, I couldn't find any additional sources to back it up. Miyagawa   (talk)  14:34, 3 January 2011 (UTC)