Talk:Selle Français/GA1

GA Review[edit]

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch

Reviewer: Casliber (talk · contribs) 14:28, 3 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Right, let's take a look....will jot notes below....cheers, Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 14:28, 3 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

It can range from 15.1 to 17.3 hands (61 to 71 inches,... - the "it" does not agree with the preceding it exactly - maybe reword the pronoun?

--Rephrased, better? --MTBW

~~Gray is found, but is much more rare,...~~ ~~- "found" ("Hey I found a Gray horse!!!") - sounds funny...actually why not trim to just, "Gray is much rarer," or "-much less common"~~

--Done --MTBW

In 1958, it was decided to merge all of the half-blood horses in France... - err, any idea on who was doing the deciding?

--Source is unclear, presumably the entity that governs stud books, but unclear in original source. I will ping @Tsaag Valren: and see if she can help. --MTBW

- - No sign of Tsaag, but I ran a translation again, and rewrote that bit. Better? --MTBW
    - Hmm, given this is GA not FA, I think I'll let it slide. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 03:21, 16 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

~~This website...missing the 'ç' ...just a typo or some weird spelling variant?~~

Weird spelling variant. --MTBW

Otherwise looking good. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 14:51, 3 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Dana appears to be busy, but I will see if I can address your concerns here. But may be a day or two, big weekend in USA. Montanabw ^(talk) 16:34, 4 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

@Dana boomer:@Casliber:@Montanabw:I'm just stopping by to check the status of this review. It has been three weeks since it was last touched. Cheers, TLSuda (talk) 16:28, 25 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

- I think I fixed everything raised here, but was there additional work needed? Dana appears to be swamped IRL, so I'll take over and do any fixes required. Montanabw ^(talk) 17:06, 25 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I'll take another look soon. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 21:42, 25 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

1. Well written?:

Prose quality:

Manual of Style compliance:

2. Factually accurate and verifiable?:

References to sources:

Citations to reliable sources, where required:

No original research:

3. Broad in coverage?:

Major aspects:

Focused:

4. Reflects a neutral point of view?:

Fair representation without bias:

5. Reasonably stable?

No edit wars, etc. (Vandalism does not count against GA):

6. Illustrated by images, when possible and appropriate?:

Images are copyright tagged, and non-free images have fair use rationales:

Images are provided where possible and appropriate, with suitable captions:

Overall:

Pass or Fail:

I think enough has been done on this article to consider it at a GA waypoint and fulfulling of criteria. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 03:21, 16 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, Cas, Did we ping @Dana boomer: on this? She's been pretty inactive this summer, but I hope she will be glad it's got the green! Montanabw ^(talk) 04:24, 16 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]