Talk:Castillonnais

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Castillonnais article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Castillonnais has been listed as one of the Natural sciences good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.

Article milestones
Date	Process	Result
July 26, 2012	Good article nominee	Listed

A fact from this article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the "Did you know?" column on July 23, 2012.

The text of the entry was: Did you know ... that although the Castillonnais horse breed has its roots in antiquity, it wasn't officially recognized until 1996?

Translation review

Hello, and thanks for the translation ! The french article is not among our best articles on french wp, it need a good review too, but there's very few informations about this breed, who exist juste in a few area. So, very few informations (and nothing in english !) --Tsaag Valren (talk) 16:03, 15 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, Amelie! I figured that since it was a Good Article on the French WP, it was at least relatively good :) If there's anything I missed (or mis-translated), please let me know. Dana boomer (talk) 23:52, 15 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Castillonnais/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Cwmhiraeth (talk · contribs) 10:37, 23 July 2012 (UTC) At first glance, the article appears to be largely in-line with the GA criteria. I will be looking at it in more detail shortly. I propose making minor copyedits and bringing any more major matters to this review. I was initially amused to see that the horses are used for logging and packing food, leaving me with a mental image of a horse working in a food processing factory![reply]

Here are a few comments on the prose: Cwmhiraeth (talk) 20:01, 24 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

"Members of the breed are either dark bay and black, and have pangare color modification, " - Do you mean dark bay or black? Is the pangare modification optional? As it stands, this sentence is unsatisfactory.

I think I've addressed this... Dana boomer (talk) 22:00, 24 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

"The physical characteristics of the breed are currently in flux" - Do you mean the characteristics have not been precisely defined? I think this needs rewording as does the related sentence in the lead.

I've done a bit of tweaking on this, so please see what you think. Basically, there is an official breed standard (what the ideal horse should look like), which breeders are working towards, but (and I'm heading into OR territory here) because of the low breed numbers and sometimes remote breeding locations, different breed lines can sometimes have some pretty varied physical types, with some horses popping up that look like straight-up Andalusian horses. Dana boomer (talk) 22:00, 24 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

" Some Castillonnais are used for logging and packing food and equipment ..." - This wants rewording for clarification. Although the word "packhorse" is commonly used, my dictionary does not include "pack" as a verb with this meaning.

Done, I think. Dana boomer (talk) 22:00, 24 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the review, Cwmhiraeth! I think I have addressed your comments above; if you see more that needs to be done or I haven't changed something to your satisfaction, please let me know. Thanks again, Dana boomer (talk) 22:00, 24 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I believe that an article such as this that is partly derived from a Wikipedia article in another language should state this somewhere on the page. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 08:05, 25 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

According to Template:Expand French (which is what was on the page when I started working on it), the tag, Template: Translated page should be placed on the talk page, which is where it currently resides. As far as I know, I don't think I've ever seen this tag (or another translation tag) used on the article itself. Dana boomer (talk) 11:13, 25 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

You're probably right. I have seen it but am unsure about the matter and cannot find the relevant guidelines.

Rate	Attribute	Review Comment
1. Well-written:
	1a. the prose is clear, concise, and understandable to an appropriately broad audience; spelling and grammar are correct.	The prose is acceptable
	1b. it complies with the Manual of Style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation.	Complies with the MOS.
2. Verifiable with no original research:
	2a. it contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline.	The references seem sufficient
	2b. reliable sources are cited inline. All content that could reasonably be challenged, except for plot summaries and that which summarizes cited content elsewhere in the article, must be cited no later than the end of the paragraph (or line if the content is not in prose).	No problem here
	2c. it contains no original research.	No
3. Broad in its coverage:
	3a. it addresses the main aspects of the topic.	It covers the main aspects adequately. The Castillonnais is a little known breed and the available information is also limited.
	3b. it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style).
	4. Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each.
	5. Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute.	Article has been expanded from a stud since the beginning of July and is stable.
6. Illustrated, if possible, by media such as images, video, or audio:
	6a. media are tagged with their copyright statuses, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content.	Images are appropriately licensed.
	6b. media are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions.	There are 2 images and both are relevant.
	7. Overall assessment.	Although short, I consider that this article passes all the criteria for Good Article status.

Are there additional problems, besides the issues listed above that I believe I have addressed? I see that all of the points in the checklist are marked with question marks... Dana boomer (talk) 18:34, 26 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

You were too quick off the mark! Cwmhiraeth (talk) 18:45, 26 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Whoops, sorry! I didn't see that you had put up the table less than a hour before I made my comment. Thanks again for the review!! Dana boomer (talk) 18:58, 26 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Castillonnais. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 21:53, 31 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]