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 17:10, 30 May 2011 [1].

Appaloosa[edit]

Appaloosa (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Toolbox
Nominator(s): Dana boomer (talk) 23:37, 11 May 2011 (UTC), User: Ealdgyth, User:Montanabw[reply]

A breed of spotted horses originally developed by the Nez Perce Indian tribe, named after a river in the northwestern United States, and now registered by the third-largest breed registry in the world - this is the Appaloosa. This article has been a long-term collaboration among many from the Equine WikiProject, although Ealdgyth, Montanabw and myself have been the driving forces on bringing the article to this point. A GA review back in 2008, two peer reviews with comments from multiple editors, more comments from many editors on the talk page, and a wonderful copyedit from Malleus have also made a huge difference in the article. We have put a lot of work into this article, and look forward to all of your comments (and hopefully your support). Dana boomer (talk) 23:37, 11 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]


Comments. As always, feel free to revert my copyediting. Please check the edit summaries. - Dank (push to talk) 03:46, 12 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  • I've tweaked this a bit. The new program is the breeding of the Nez Perce Horse, a new cross between the Appaloosa and the Akhal-Teke. The part about selective breeding being a tradition is important, IMO, because it shows a continuation of the selective breeding they did with the Appaloosa, brought into the 21st century with the NPH. However, I could be wrong... - DB
  • Yep, that's the deal, the Nez Perce want to bring back their traditional animal, as opposed to the spotted quarter horse look that's more common today. I'll play with that a bit more. I think Dana got the rest --MTBW
  • Changed to "and" - DB
  • Done - DB
  • I've made a few changes per your comments above. Please let us know if further work is needed, and thanks for the support! Dana boomer (talk) 11:28, 14 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Source review - spotchecks not done

  • Done - DB
  • These two done. Didn't see any others, but will keep my eye out - DB
  • Fixed - DB
  • Think I fixed this? - DB
  • Done - DB
  • Done - DB
  • AFAIK, no volume/issue # for any of these, just dates and page numbers. A lot of horse magazines don't use volume/issue numbers. - DB
  • Fixed - DB
  • Think I got them all - DB
  • Done - DB
  • Done - DB
  • Fixed, although a couple are listed as "No location given" Ealdgyth - Talk 18:39, 12 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Found a location for one per ISBN to WorldCat, noted on talk page, not sure if I should fix, or...?
I have begun work on the above issues; more later. Dana boomer (talk) 16:46, 12 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Units

Lightmouse (talk) 10:40, 14 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Done. Dana boomer (talk) 11:28, 14 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. Looking good for me now. Lightmouse (talk) 17:02, 15 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Comments –

  • Where? I'm missing what was double-linked? (Can fix if we know what you spotted) --MTBW
  • Fixed. --MTBW
  • Fixed. --MTBW
  • Will tweak, see what you think --MTBW
  • Dana fixed that -- MTBW (for Dana)
  • Looks like Dana fixed that too. --MTBW
    • I'll let you two fight that one out, whatever the wikigods decree, we shall humbly obey ;-) --MTBW
    • Support. Says here that commas are optional for four-digit numbers. Never noticed that before. Oh, and I support since everything up there is done, and this is a fine article overall. Giants2008 (27 and counting) 01:23, 18 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Equine Recurrent Uveitis and congenital stationary night blindness — Why is the first capped, and the second lower case. Is this inconsistency, or is there a reason?
  • I'm taking a stab here, but "congenital stationary night blindness" is probably a generic term for a number of complexes, and ERU is probably one defined disorder/disease. My understanding is you capitalize single diseases, but I could be wrong here. Better to check with MTBW though, as they are the expert on the blindness thing in horses, not me. I do bloodlines and history, the others do the usage/diseases stuff. Ealdgyth - Talk 21:29, 16 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • I like Ealdgyth's explanation, but the main reason it's probably really that way is that it's capitalized in the Wikipedia article on that topic!  :-) We can do whatever the wiki MOS wants us to do, just someone let us know which is preferred. Montanabw(talk) 00:23, 17 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Skin mottling is "a basic and decisive indicator of an Appaloosa" and is usually seen around the muzzle, eyes, anus, and genitalia. — I'm unclear, the photos seem to show much more wide-spread spotting than just those areas
  • Skin mottling is different than spotting, and can be seen in Appaloosas with solid coat color (no difference in hair color). This is discussed further in the "Color rule controversy" section, but basically, a horse with leopard complex genetics won't always have a spotted coat, but will almost always have skin mottling in the locations listed. This last fact is what makes it one of the secondary characteristics that is looked for when registering a non-spotted Appaloosa. - DB
  • Yes, like Dana said, and the registry states it that way in their standards. Also, the mottling isn't quite the same as the "halo" effect seen under the hair coat spots, in fact the body skin isn't mottled the way the "bare" skin is around the genitals, eyes and muzzle. Weird, but there it is. Montanabw(talk) 00:23, 17 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • King Louis XIV of France — Is "king" necessary, there can't be many other Louis XIV of Frances?
  • Done. - DB
  • (Autumn, 2010). — Looks odd and inconsistent having only one ref with a month/season. If it's needed to avoid ambiguity, can it be moved to the title?
  • This is a quarterly publication where the date of publication is given by the season (spring, summer, autumn, fall). So, IMO, it actually is consistent with the other references; it's just that we have used no other quarterly publications, so this one instance stands out a bit. I'm not sure why we would move the "autumn" to the title? - DB
  • Verified what Dana said. I have the hardcopy; this is a quarterly publication. I believe that the "date" parameter is correct, though "issue" might work? (I don't really get template syntax very well). But definitely not part of the title. Montanabw(talk) 00:23, 17 May 2011 (UTC) Follow up: per online cite, http://mhs.mt.gov/pub/magazine/autumn2010.asp added Volume and issue number to template (someone fix it if I got it formatted wrong??). Montanabw(talk) 00:38, 17 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Can US states be written in full in the cited texts for the benefit of us poor limeys?
  • Done - DB
I've replied to most of the above comments, but am leaving the first one because I'm really not sure. Hopefully my co-noms have a better idea on this than I do. Thanks for the comments, Jim! Dana boomer (talk) 15:31, 16 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Indeed, the ERU capitalization is probably one of these things that's all over the place on wiki. Whatever the wiki MOS says for diseases with specific names in general, we shall do. (But if we go lower case, we will need to rename the other article too, probably) Even the horse articles are all over the place on this, so not a huge deal for us. Montanabw(talk) 00:25, 17 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Yes, the caps issue needs resolution, but it looks as if it's beyond the scope of this FAC, so changed to support above Jimfbleak - talk to me? 06:02, 17 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
"SPOT?" Ohhhh baaaad pun for this article! LOL! Montanabw(talk) 15:53, 19 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
In mid-18th century Europe, there was a great demand for horses with the Appaloosa coat pattern among the nobility and royalty. - strictly speaking I suspect this is anomalous as this predates the development of the breed and the name. Can we just say "spotted" here?
Went with "...there was a great demand for horses with the leopard complex spotting pattern among the nobility and royalty." as we'd just used "spotted coat" in the previous sentence. Ealdgyth - Talk 13:44, 19 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Agreed
and thus were notable as horse breeders by the early 19th century - erm, well anyone who keeps horses breeds them? I guess I'd tweak to "and thus were highly regarded as horse breeders by the early 19th century" or "and thus were notable as able/canny/good horse breeders by the early 19th century" or something....
No, actually, not everyone who keeps horses breeds them. Lots of Native American tribes sorta kinda bred horses, but only the NP were really noted as breeders. Kinda like how a lot of noblemen in England had horses but only a few were noted breeders. Ealdgyth - Talk 12:05, 19 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Yep. Like E said... Montanabw(talk) 15:53, 19 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
is a very basic and decisive indication --> "confirms" (?) or "is proof positive" (??)
(I assumed you didn't mean to change the direct quote) now reads "...therefore this characteristic is proof positive of membership in the breed." Ealdgyth - Talk 13:44, 19 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I hesitate to depart from the quotation -- we have no clue WHAT this means, I'm going to fiddle with that a bit, open to further suggestions. Can't "prove" anything until they release a DNA test for LP. (Which is in the works but not out yet). Montanabw(talk) 15:53, 19 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Okay, I can understand teh need for care here. Casliber (talk · contribs) 01:19, 20 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Looking good otherwise (dang, forgot I reviewed this for GAN! Looks much improved since then :)) Casliber (talk · contribs) 11:28, 19 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Images

  • I just removed these - we're still trying to figure out where the author of the book we got them from originally got the photos from. Easier to just remove. Ealdgyth - Talk 21:19, 26 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • And I put one back; I don't care about the circus image, though it's cool. But for the two men with the Appy, I have scraped the bottom of the barrel on this image. I also fixed the tag. The copyright status of the book (Appaloosa: The Spotted Horse in Art and History) is public domain, because it was published in 1963 and the rights were never renewed on it. There's no doubt about that. As for the original photographer, I personally contacted the Amon Carter Museum, the University of Texas Press (both involved in publishing the Haines book), Elliot West, and the Montana Historical Society (MHS), which used the image in the West article (scanned from the Haines book) and they were, likewise, unable to track it to any place other than the Haines book. Essentially, the MHS staff did an extensive search and they couldn't locate the original anywhere (they commented that if the original it still exists, it's probably in a box in someone's attic). The person who took the photo was "Mary Himes of Cayuse, Oregon", I did find here a Mary Himes born in 1877, but no clue if the same person. If push comes to shove, we can put this under a fair use designation, I suppose. I mean, I don't intend to derail the FA over one image, but it seems that there has got to be a way to salvage this image, which I consider a pretty critical image for the article, showing the people most responsible for the breed with a typical representative. Montanabw(talk) 22:05, 26 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Grammar ?? "Domesticated horses with leopard spotting patterns have been depicted in art as far back as Ancient Greece ... " SandyGeorgia (Talk) 03:45, 27 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

My eyes have fried on that one, I've seen it too many times, but am open to ideas to fix. All the nuances are needed, domesticated, leopard spotting, ancient Greece -- evidence of how far back the pattern has been desired by humans is the point. Montanabw(talk) 19:59, 27 May 2011 (UTC) Follow up: I took a whack at this, not sure I improved matters, am still open to any way to say it better. Montanabw(talk) 20:10, 27 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

How ?? "The Appaloosa has influenced many other horse breeds, ... " This is explained in the body of the article, but is unclear in the lead. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 03:53, 27 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Fixed, I hope. Open to suggestions if there is a better way to say that. :-) Montanabw(talk) 19:59, 27 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Inline query left in the lead. I am not sure all of those External links to different clubs is a good idea-- could tend to become a farm, and Wikipedia is WP:NOT a directory. Can't those be added via a DMOZ link instead? See the Open Directory Project links at the bottom of Tourette syndrome. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 16:13, 30 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Fixed inline inquiry. Not sure DMOZ is a solution to the External links, part of me just says toss 'em all. But thoughts, everyone? Montanabw(talk) 20:54, 30 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]


Thank you Sandy! Montanabw(talk) 20:54, 30 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.
More