Talk:Poitevin horse/GA1

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

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

Hi Dana, no real problems, just some nitpicks
 * Trait mulassier &mdash; of the four possible combinations of caps and lc, this seems the least plausible
 * this has not been proven by &mdash; 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 &mdash;  clergy?
 * The head is long and strong,[9] with a convex profile;[5] the ears thick and long. &mdash; missing word?
 * Mesolithic &mdash; could indicate what time range this covers
 * through the beginning of World War I &mdash; should that be "up to" or is there something missing?
 * ateliers (workshops) &mdash; 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)

 Jimfbleak -  talk to me?  07:27, 13 April 2013 (UTC)
 * became more rare &mdash; rarer?
 * By the early 1990s, population numbers fell to the lowest seen. &mdash; bit clunky
 * They are used to pull hitches for tourists &mdash; what's a hitch?
 * External links has no visible content, do you need the heading?
 * 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):
 * 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):
 * 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: