Talk:Pryor Mountain mustang/GA1

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

Reviewer: Seabuckthorn (talk · contribs) 17:54, 22 January 2014 (UTC)

Nominator: Dana boomer (talk)

Hi! I'll be reviewing this article for GA status, and should have my full review up shortly. -- Seabuckthorn   ♥  17:54, 22 January 2014 (UTC)

1: Well-written
 * a. Prose is "clear and concise", without copyvios, or spelling and grammar errors:
 * b. MoS compliance for lead, layout, words to watch, fiction, and lists:

Check for WP:LEAD:


 * 1) Check for Correct Structure of Lead Section:  ✅
 * 2) Check for Citations (WP:LEADCITE):  ✅
 * 3) Check for Introductory text:  ✅
 * 4) * Check for Provide an accessible overview (MOS:INTRO): ✅
 * 5) ** Major Point 1: Characteristics "Pryor Mountain Mustangs are relatively small horses, exhibit a natural ambling gait, and domesticated Pryor Mountain Mustangs are known for their strength, surefootedness and stamina." ( not a concise summary of the Characteristics section, it should be expanded )
 * 6) ** Major Point 2: History "Feral horses are documented as … which gave the horses additional protection." (summarised well in the lead)
 * 7) ** Major Point 3: Genetics "considered to be genetically unique and one of the few strains of horses verified by DNA analysis to be descended from the original Colonial Spanish Horses brought to the Americas by the Spanish." & "Genetic studies have revealed that the herd exhibits a high degree of genetic diversity and a low degree of inbreeding, and BLM has acknowledged the genetic uniqueness of the herd." ( not a concise summary of the Genetics section )
 * 8) ** Major Point 4: Management "The BLM management of the herd has … were given contraceptives to slow herd growth." ( not a concise summary of the  section )
 * 9) ** Major Point 5: Tourism "" ( not in the lead )
 * 10) * Check for Relative emphasis: ✅
 * 11) ** Major Point 1: Characteristics "Pryor Mountain Mustangs are relatively small horses, exhibit a natural ambling gait, and domesticated Pryor Mountain Mustangs are known for their strength, surefootedness and stamina." ( the lead does not give due weight as is given in the body, it should be expanded )
 * 12) ** Major Point 2: History "Feral horses are documented as … which gave the horses additional protection." (the lead gives due weight as is given in the body)
 * 13) ** Major Point 3: Genetics "considered to be genetically unique and one of the few strains of horses verified by DNA analysis to be descended from the original Colonial Spanish Horses brought to the Americas by the Spanish." & "Genetic studies have revealed that the herd exhibits a high degree of genetic diversity and a low degree of inbreeding, and BLM has acknowledged the genetic uniqueness of the herd." ( the lead does not give due weight as is given in the body )
 * 14) ** Major Point 4: Management "The BLM management of the herd has … were given contraceptives to slow herd growth." ( the lead does not give due weight as is given in the body )
 * 15) ** Major Point 5: Tourism "" ( not in the lead )
 * 16) * Check for Opening paragraph (MOS:BEGIN): ✅
 * 17) ** Check for First sentence (WP:LEADSENTENCE): ✅
 * 18) *** The Pryor Mountain Mustang is a substrain of Mustang considered to be genetically unique and one of the few strains of horses verified by DNA analysis to be descended from the original Colonial Spanish Horses brought to the Americas by the Spanish.
 * 19) ** Check for Format of the first sentence (MOS:BOLDTITLE): ✅
 * 20) ** Check for Proper names and titles: ✅
 * 21) ** Check for Abbreviations and synonyms (MOS:BOLDSYN): None
 * 22) ** Check for Foreign language (MOS:FORLANG): None
 * 23) ** Check for Pronunciation: None
 * 24) ** Check for Contextual links (MOS:CONTEXTLINK): ✅
 * 25) ** Check for Biographies: NA
 * 26) ** Check for Organisms: NA
 * 27) Check for Biographies of living persons:  NA
 * 28) Check for Alternative names (MOS:LEADALT):  ✅
 * 29) * Check for Non-English titles:
 * 30) * Check for Usage in first sentence:
 * 31) * Check for Separate section usage:
 * 32) Check for Length (WP:LEADLENGTH):  ✅
 * 33) * The lead should be expanded.
 * 34) Check for Clutter (WP:LEADCLUTTER):  None

✅

Check for WP:LAYOUT: ✅


 * 1) Check for Body sections: WP:BODY, MOS:BODY.  ✅
 * 2) * Check for Headings and sections: ✅
 * 3) * Check for Section templates and summary style: ✅
 * 4) * Check for Paragraphs (MOS:PARAGRAPHS): ✅
 * 5) Check for Standard appendices and footers (MOS:APPENDIX):  ✅
 * 6) * Check for Order of sections (WP:ORDER): ✅
 * 7) * Check for Works or publications: ✅
 * 8) * Check for See also section (MOS:SEEALSO): ✅
 * 9) * Check for Notes and references (WP:FNNR): ✅
 * 10) * Check for Further reading (WP:FURTHER): None
 * 11) * Check for External links (WP:LAYOUTEL): None
 * 12) * Check for Links to sister projects: None
 * 13) * Check for Navigation templates: ✅
 * 14) Check for Formatting:  ✅
 * 15) * Check for Images (WP:LAYIM): ✅
 * 16) * Check for Links: ✅
 * 17) * Check for Horizontal rule (WP:LINE): ✅

✅

Check for WP:WTW: ✅


 * 1) Check for Words that may introduce bias:  ✅
 * 2) * Check for Puffery (WP:PEA): ✅
 * 3) * Check for Contentious labels (WP:LABEL): ✅
 * 4) * Check for Unsupported attributions (WP:WEASEL): ✅
 * 5) * Check for Expressions of doubt (WP:ALLEGED): ✅
 * 6) * Check for Editorializing (MOS:OPED): ✅
 * 7) * Check for Synonyms for said (WP:SAY): ✅
 * 8) Check for Expressions that lack precision:  ✅
 * 9) * Check for Euphemisms (WP:EUPHEMISM): ✅
 * 10) * Check for Clichés and idioms (WP:IDIOM): ✅
 * 11) * Check for Relative time references (WP:REALTIME): ✅
 * 12) * Check for Neologisms (WP:PEA): None
 * 13) Check for Offensive material (WP:F***):  ✅

Check for WP:MOSFICT: ✅


 * 1) Check for Real-world perspective (WP:Real world):  ✅
 * 2) * Check for Primary and secondary information (WP:PASI): ✅
 * 3) * Check for Contextual presentation (MOS:PLOT): ✅

None


 * Prose is preferred over list (WP:PROSE):
 * Check for Tables (MOS:TABLES):

2: Verifiable with no original research
 * a. Has an appropriate reference section: Yes
 * b. Citation to reliable sources where necessary: excellent (Thorough check on Google. Cross-checked with other FAs)

✅

Check for WP:RS: ✅

Cross-checked with other FAs: Icelandic horse, Marwari horse, Andalusian horse, Haflinger (horse), Boulonnais horse, Poitevin horse & one GA Kiger Mustang


 * 1) Check for the material (WP:RSVETTING):  (not contentious) ✅
 * 2) * Is it contentious?: No
 * 3) * Does the ref indeed support the material?:
 * 4) Check for the author (WP:RSVETTING):  ✅
 * 5) * Who is the author?:
 * 6) * Does the author have a Wikipedia article?:
 * 7) * What are the author's academic credentials and professional experience?:
 * 8) * What else has the author published?:
 * 9) * Is the author, or this work, cited in other reliable sources? In academic works?:
 * 10) Check for the publication (WP:RSVETTING):  ✅
 * 11) Check for Self-published sources (WP:SPS):

✅

Check for inline citations WP:MINREF: ✅


 * 1) Check for Direct quotations:  ✅
 * 2) Check for Likely to be challenged:  ✅
 * 3) Check for Contentious material about living persons (WP:BLP):  NA


 * c. No original research: ✅

✅


 * 1) Check for primary sources (WP:PRIMARY):  ✅
 * 2) Check for synthesis (WP:SYN):  ✅
 * 3) Check for original images (WP:OI):  ✅

3: Broad in its coverage

✅

Cross-checked with other FAs: Icelandic horse, Marwari horse, Andalusian horse, Haflinger (horse), Boulonnais horse, Poitevin horse & one GA Kiger Mustang


 * 1) Check for Article scope as defined by reliable sources:
 * 2) Check for The extent of the subject matter in these RS:
 * 3) Check for Out of scope:
 * 4) Check for The range of material that belongs in the article:
 * 5) Check for All material that is notable is covered:
 * 6) Check for All material that is referenced is covered:
 * 7) Check for All material that a reader would be likely to agree matches the specified scope is covered:
 * 8) Check for The most general scope that summarises essentially all knowledge:
 * 9) Check for Stay on topic and no wandering off-topic (WP:OFFTOPIC):

✅


 * 1) Check for Readability issues (WP:LENGTH):
 * 2) Check for Article size (WP:TOO LONG!):

4: Neutral

✅

4. Fair representation without bias: ✅


 * 1) Check for POV (WP:YESPOV):  ✅
 * 2) Check for naming (WP:POVNAMING):  ✅
 * 3) Check for structure (WP:STRUCTURE):  ✅
 * 4) Check for Due and undue weight (WP:DUE):  ✅
 * 5) Check for Balancing aspects (WP:BALASPS):  ✅
 * 6) Check for Giving "equal validity" (WP:VALID):  ✅
 * 7) Check for Balance (WP:YESPOV):  ✅
 * 8) Check for Impartial tone (WP:IMPARTIAL):  ✅
 * 9) Check for Describing aesthetic opinions (WP:SUBJECTIVE):  ✅
 * 10) Check for Words to watch (WP:YESPOV):  ✅
 * 11) Check for Attributing and specifying biased statements (WP:ATTRIBUTEPOV):  ✅
 * 12) Check for Fringe theories and pseudoscience (WP:PSCI):  None
 * 13) Check for Religion (WP:RNPOV):  None

5: Stable: No edit wars, etc: Yes

6: Images ✅ (PD)

✅

6: Images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid fair use rationales are provided for non-free content: ✅


 * 1) Check for copyright tags (WP:TAGS):  ✅
 * 2) Check for copyright status:  ✅ Free
 * 3) Check for non-free content (WP:NFC):  None
 * 4) Check for valid fair use rationales (WP:FUR):  NA

6: Images are provided if possible and are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions: ✅


 * 1) Check for image relevance (WP:IMAGE RELEVANCE):  ✅
 * 2) Check for Images for the lead (WP:LEADIMAGE):  ✅
 * 3) Check for suitable captions (WP:CAPTION):  ✅

As per the above checklist, the issues identified are :
 * The lead does not provide an accessible overview and does not give relative emphasis.
 * The lead should be expanded.
 * " That same year, a private group calling itself the Pryor Mountains Mustang Breeders Association was formed to preserve the gene pool of the herd and establish a registry for Pryor Mountains horses in private hands." (calling itself here has condescending connotations, the section Registry in the source (Lynghaug, p. 105.) says "The Pryor Mountain Mustang Breeders Association (PMMBA) was founded in 1992 to preserve ..." which is a very neutral position, I’d recommend a reparaphrasing to match the position of the source , also it was founded in 1992 not 1994 as is mentioned in the article "That same year")
 * FIXED --Montanabw

This article is a very promising GA nominee. I’m glad to see your work here. All the best, --  Seabuckthorn   ♥  21:51, 25 January 2014 (UTC)


 * Hi Seabuckthorn, I'm one of the people who helped edit this article, along with Dana. However, I am a bit concerned with your interpretation of WP:LEAD; while the lead may be improved upon, we are actively discouraged from going for more then 3 to 4 paragraphs, we need to be concise. I did think your comment that a bit on tourism in the lede could be added - that was a good idea and I threw in one sentence about it.  I'll also defer to Dana's view, but at present I respectfully disagree with your assessment of the characteristics and genetics summaries, we mention both, though scattered a bit throughout the lede, and I do not really see what's missing -- adding much more would get into into excess detail.  However, perhaps I am too close to the content to see it with fresh eyes, so do you have specific suggestions?  Montanabw (talk) 06:15, 26 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Hi! Thank you very much for your polite explanation. Our goal is to improve the article and not to incorporate every suggestion given in the review. I'm good in committing mistakes so don't worry.  I agree with you that the lead should not be expanded, I misjudged it. Apologies. I'm striking it from the review. But I also feel that the lead gives too much due weight to the history, which I feel may be compressed to make way for the expansion of other points. Lets take Dana's view on this as final. To stress again, the article should be our top most priority and not the review.  --  Seabuckthorn   ♥  07:32, 26 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the review, Seabuckthorn! Montanabw is correct that per WP:LEAD, the lead for an article of this size should be about three paragraphs. However, you are correct that the weighting was a little off. Between Montanabw and I, I think we have managed to get the weighting to a more appropriate level - adding a sentence on the tourism section, trimming the early history a bit and adding more from the management and genetics sections. It's still about the same length (expanded only slightly), but the information contained has changed quite a bit. Would you like to take another look and see what you think of the new version? Dana boomer (talk) 15:12, 27 January 2014 (UTC)


 * Looks good to me if it looks good to everyone else, made a minor tweak to note the Pryor herd is the only feral herd -- plenty of people raising Mustangs in Montana. ;-) Montanabw (talk) 00:21, 28 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Thanks! The article looks perfect now. --  Seabuckthorn   ♥  10:56, 28 January 2014 (UTC)

Promoting the article to GA status. -- Seabuckthorn   ♥  10:56, 28 January 2014 (UTC)