Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Andalusian horse/archive1


 * The following is an archived discussion of a featured article nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured article candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.

The article was promoted by SandyGeorgia 00:03, 24 September 2010.

Andalusian horse

 * Nominator(s): Dana boomer (talk) 15:27, 8 September 2010 (UTC)

The Andalusian horse was a favorite of European kings as early as the 15th century and is a favorite of classical dressage enthusiasts today. They are the main feature in a controversy regarding bloodline purity and studbook rights, a controversy which makes their registration and naming system rather complicated. The article has been copyedited by Malleus, received an image review by Elcobbola, received GA and literature reviews from Sasata and had eyes on it from the other main equine editors on WP, Montanabw and Ealdgyth. Dana boomer (talk) 15:27, 8 September 2010 (UTC)

Comments the link to this imh.org page currently gives an internal server error, even though imh.org itself is reachable. Access date given for the link is 2009-06-12, so the page has perhaps moved. No problems with dablinks. PL290 (talk) 15:45, 8 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Gah. The link is now fixed. I am convinced that IMH renames all of their sub-pages on a quarterly basis just to screw with people... Dana boomer (talk) 15:55, 8 September 2010 (UTC)
 * I agree with Dana. They get bored and redo their web site.  Again and again... arrgh!   Montanabw (talk) 22:27, 9 September 2010 (UTC)

Sources comments: Sources look fine, just a couple of formatting suggestions:- Brianboulton (talk) 13:33, 10 September 2010 (UTC)
 * The citation style is a little heavy-footed. The short citation style would give, for example, "7. Llamas, p. 313". There is no need to repeat the work title in short citations, as you have done.
 * "Great Britain" is not specific enough as the location for Harrap. Use London.
 * I've changed the Harrap reference to London. As for your first comment, AFAIK there is nothing prohibiting the use of the title in short citations. It's the style I prefer and the style I have used in all of the other horse FAs I have written. Thank you for your comments! Dana boomer (talk) 13:55, 10 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Hi Brian, we got into adding titles to the short cites due to, in part, multiple authors with the same last name on some major horse works (Edwards, Bennett, etc...). It starts looking funny and inconsistent when some your cites have both author and title names but not all.  I kind of kicked and whined a little about this when we started doing it, but have come around to its logic, and the format has passed muster with several previous FAs, not just Dana's.  Hope this helps explain things.   Montanabw (talk) 21:48, 10 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Horse sense. Brianboulton (talk) 12:02, 11 September 2010 (UTC)


 * image review All the images are suitably licensed, so no problems  Jimfbleak -  talk to me?  15:06, 10 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Thank you for your note. Also, to closing delegate, please note that a pre-FAC image review was completed by Elcobolla (I can link to it if necessary, the clearance was on my talk page) and no issues were found. Dana boomer (talk) 16:41, 10 September 2010 (UTC)


 * Support - made some minor tweaks as I went through, but nicely polished to the point that I can't see ought else to improve... muy bien Casliber (talk · contribs) 03:36, 16 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Thank you for your review, copyedits and support, Cas! Dana boomer (talk) 22:29, 16 September 2010 (UTC)


 * Support — Rlevse • Talk  • 13:52, 19 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Thank you for your review and support, Rlevse! Dana boomer (talk) 14:26, 19 September 2010 (UTC)


 * Support Comments by Sasata (talk) 18:35, 20 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Meets all the FAC criteria. Sasata (talk) 04:58, 21 September 2010 (UTC)


 * "The breed tends to have clean legs" does clean mean not hairy in this context?
 * No, here it means "without blemishes or injuries" - in other words, healthy Montanabw (talk) 22:39, 20 September 2010 (UTC)
 * I've added in a little bit of explanation to hopefully clear up the jargon.


 * "There are two additional, unique characteristics of the Carthusian strain" is the comma really needed here?
 * Fixed with a minor rephrase.  Montanabw (talk) 23:09, 20 September 2010 (UTC)


 * a close-up photo of the "horns" would be neat, if available (same does not apply to the butt warts)
 * LOL on butt warts! We'd give our eyeteeth for a photo of these "horns", to be honest.  There are a couple articles where it would be nice. They are quite rare, I've never seen a horse with them, as far as I know...and I've seen a lot of horses.  (MTBW)
 * Ditto to what Montana says. I've searched high and low for even a decent free body shot - I ask you: what's so hard about a clean horse, with good conformation, standing still, on flat ground, with no messy something or other in the background? Apparently everything, because I've been looking for a couple of years for that exact shot! Anyways, if I ever find a picture of the horns, the first placce it's going is this article - I promise! Dana boomer (talk) 00:46, 21 September 2010 (UTC)


 * "while moving at the trot." I'd say moving at a trot (but then again, I don't know horse lingo)
 * It's "the" trot, but also not a real moral issue...  ;-)   Montanabw (talk) 23:09, 20 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Montana is correct that this is how it's phrased in the horsey world, but also correct that it's not a huge deal. So if you want us to change it, just say so :) Dana boomer (talk) 00:46, 21 September 2010 (UTC)


 * "…movement consistent with the more elevated way of going typically found in this breed" "Going" sounds a little odd to me…
 * "Way of going" is horse lingo. (In fact, just yesterday, I made the disambig page for going)    Montanabw (talk) 22:39, 20 September 2010 (UTC)
 * I've linked it, if that makes it any better? Dana boomer (talk) 00:46, 21 September 2010 (UTC)


 * "… as a complication of the intestinal issues." May sound a bit odd unless you know the medical meaning of complication (e.g. the intestinal tissues are complicated?) perhaps a link or reword for clarity?
 * Linked and rephrased a bit. See if that helps.   Montanabw (talk) 23:17, 20 September 2010 (UTC)


 * link pedigree
 * Linked to pedigree chart, the best link.  Montanabw (talk) 23:17, 20 September 2010 (UTC)


 * quotes shouldn't be blockquoted unless over four lines, says the MOS
 * True, but it looks cool. Can't we keep it? ;-)   Montanabw (talk) 23:17, 20 September 2010 (UTC)
 * I know what MOS says, but I would really like to keep this quote separate because it so describes the way the breed has been seen and described for over 300 years. If we can't keep it as a blockquote, what about a pull-quote in a box? Dana boomer (talk) 00:46, 21 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Honestly, I don't really care, I just felt it was my duty as reviewer to mention it. Are boxed pull-quotes MOS-compliant? That might be a good solution. Sasata (talk) 04:58, 21 September 2010 (UTC)
 * We were "allowed" to use one in the FAC for Horses in World War I, so I'm assuming they're OK. I've pulled the quote out and moved the existing images around to make it as obvious as possible. Better? Dana boomer (talk) 10:51, 21 September 2010 (UTC)


 * "In the 16th century, Henry VIII received gifts of Spanish horses from Charles V, Ferdinand II of Aragon and the Duke of Savoy and more upon his wedding to Katherine of Aragon, as well as purchasing additional war and riding horses through agents in Spain." received … purchasing -> tenses don't match
 * Rephrased a bit, did that help?  Montanabw (talk) 23:17, 20 September 2010 (UTC)


 * "The Spanish horse was at its peak in Great Britain during the 17th century," peak of popularity? Abundance?
 * Dunno. That one's Dana's source, I think.   Montanabw (talk) 23:17, 20 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Popularity. I rephrased, but may have made it a little repetitive (peak of popularity...lost this popularity). What do you think? Dana boomer (talk) 00:46, 21 September 2010 (UTC)
 * It is a bit repetitive ... can we replace the final "remained popular" with "were favored" or something similar? Sasata (talk) 04:58, 21 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Did some tweaking here; see what you think. Dana boomer (talk) 10:51, 21 September 2010 (UTC)


 * "Many Spanish explorers from the 16th century on carried Spanish horses for both war and breeding with them in their exploration and conquests." This sentence construction lends itself to humorous misinterpretation
 * LOL! Who knows?  Maybe multiple interpretations are true? (But I suppose that sort of speculation is OR, huh?)  Montanabw (talk) 22:39, 20 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Aw heck, I rephrased that a bit, anyway, hope it helps.  Montanabw (talk) 23:17, 20 September 2010 (UTC)


 * "In 1832, an epidemic seriously affected Spain's horse population" epidemic of what?
 * Dunno. Dana?  That one's yours, I think!   Montanabw (talk) 22:39, 20 September 2010 (UTC)
 * All my sources say is that there was an epidemic of illness. None of them say what it was. Dana boomer (talk) 00:46, 21 September 2010 (UTC)


 * "…and their pure- and part-bred offspring." according to the WP:Dash, hanging hyphen are discouraged (but I use them all the time; WP:IAR and all that)
 * Removed part of this, so that it just says "and their offspring", which covers everything, I think. Dana boomer (talk) 00:46, 21 September 2010 (UTC)


 * there's a mix of studbook and stud book
 * Changed all to "stud book" (I think, let me know if I missed any). Dana boomer (talk) 00:46, 21 September 2010 (UTC)


 * link genetic variability
 * Done by Montana. Dana boomer (talk) 00:46, 21 September 2010 (UTC)


 * "A 2005 study found that the supposed difference between Carthusian and non-Carthusian horses is not supported by genetic evidence" Typically only one or a few genes are used in studies like these, so it might be worthwhile to be explicit in mentioning what genes were used in their analysis.
 * As far as I can see, the source does not give the exact genes used to determine this. However, reading genetic studies gives me a headache, and so I may have missed it :) The reference is freely available online, if you think you might have better luck with it. (Or I can just e-mail you the PDF if you don't feel like going hunting). Dana boomer (talk) 00:46, 21 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Email it to me? I have everything EXCEPT Valera, M., A. Molinab, J.P. Gutie´rrezc, J. Go´mezb, F. Goyached (2005). "Pedigree analysis in the Andalusian horse: population structure, genetic variability and influence of the Carthusian strain". Livestock Production Science (95): 57–66.   Montanabw (talk) 01:21, 21 September 2010 (UTC)
 * OK, it's a Fst value, I'm trying to figure out if there is any way to put this into understandable English.  Genetics are bad enough.  Add statistical analysis to it and even I am running for cover, screaming!   Montanabw (talk) 02:18, 21 September 2010 (UTC) Follow up: I put in a bit of detail for those who might care, wikilinking to some relevant articles.  However, I confess that it's possibly gibberish as the calculations boggled my brain!  We can toss it all if it doesn't make sense.  The phrase "...is not supported by genetic evidence" is straight from the source. And they said it three time!   Montanabw (talk) 02:40, 21 September 2010 (UTC)
 * I tweaked it a bit but it looks fine to me. Sasata (talk) 04:58, 21 September 2010 (UTC)


 * "However, there is a slight physical difference between the two, with the Carthusian tending to show a more "oriental" or concave head shape and are more often gray in color" something wrong with the grammar here
 * Wow, that was a horrible sentence. I've split it and reworded - hopefully all of the tenses match now. Dana boomer (talk) 00:52, 21 September 2010 (UTC)


 * "…believed to trace to the foundation stallion Esclavo" foundation should be linked here, rather than the later occurrences in the article
 * Moved link up here, removed two other instances. Dana boomer (talk) 00:52, 21 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Here, the piped link is on the words "foundation stallion" the later link is directly to the phrase "foundation bloodstock," used to reference both sexes of horses of a different breed and unnamed. So there are two uses with slightly different meanings that happen to link to the same article, which covers both concepts.  Not sure what the best approach is, but open to MOS comment.   Montanabw (talk) 01:08, 21 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Ah didn't realize there were nuances. Whatever you think is best. Sasata (talk) 04:58, 21 September 2010 (UTC)


 * "…and the strain would have become extinct if not for the efforts of the Zapata family." we don't know this for sure, so "might have" seems more appropriate
 * Fixed. Dana boomer (talk) 00:52, 21 September 2010 (UTC)


 * "Today, the Carthusian strain is raised in state-owned studs" I assumes "studs" is shorthand for stud farms?
 * Yes, I'll get it properly linked Montanabw (talk) 22:39, 20 September 2010 (UTC)
 * This has been done. Dana boomer (talk) 00:52, 21 September 2010 (UTC)


 * "Asociación Nacional de Criadores de Caballo de Pura Raza Española" should this be in italics because it's foreign language?
 * Fixed. Montanabw (talk) 23:09, 20 September 2010 (UTC)


 * classical dressage is linked thrice in the article
 * Fixed. And it's cool that you said "thrice."   Montanabw (talk) 23:09, 20 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Yes, it's elegant and underused. I've already taught my young kids to use it, so hopefully they can help influence the younger generation. Sasata (talk) 04:58, 21 September 2010 (UTC)


 * Thanks for the notes, Sasata. I'll fix some, Dana may have to fix others.  Let us know if the explanations of the horse lingo help or if more is needed there.   Montanabw (talk) 22:39, 20 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Thank you very much Sasata! I think I've gotten everything that Montana didn't - let us know if there are more fixes that are needed!


 * Quick comment – A few of the references (20, 50 and 60) should have indications that the links are in PDF format. The symbol will show up, but I'm sure not everyone will know what it means.  Giants2008  ( 27 and counting ) 23:47, 20 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Done, I think. Dana boomer (talk) 00:24, 21 September 2010 (UTC)


 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.