Wikipedia:Peer review/Finnhorse/archive1

Finnhorse[edit]

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch • Watch peer review

This peer review discussion has been closed.
I've listed this article for peer review because I'm aiming for a GA or even a FA with this article. I have expanded it massively, and along the road lost my ability to properly evaluate it. It is quite a read, so I'll be happy if you'll be able to review a section or two. Not being an English speaker natively, I'd also be thankful for any copyediting.

I will be combing through the article tomorrow evening with the automated tips tool.

Thanks, Pitke (talk) 07:15, 15 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Of course, a major question is whether the history section should be summarised and made into a separate article. Pitke (talk) 07:38, 15 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Finetooth comments: This is very good. With a few relatively minor changes, I think it would pass GA, and it is not far from ready for FAC. The writing is excellent, and the article appears to be comprehensive to an outsider (me) with no special knowledge of the content. It is well-illustrated and appears generally verifiable. I did a bit of minor proofing as I went, and below are some suggestions about layout and Manual of Style issues. I read quickly from the "History" section onwards and no doubt missed some other small things, but I noticed no big problems. The article is long but does not seem repetitive; I would not make it any longer, but I don't see anything to necessarily put on the chopping block. If you decide to make the history section into a separate article, that would be fine, I think, and it might make the existing article a bit more appealing to the average reader.

There's now a three-user consensus that the history section should not be made separate (due to various reasons). However, the history section has been cut down for several hundred words since I posted this request for Peer Review. Pitke (talk) 18:58, 25 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

WP:MOS#IMAGES suggests keeping images within the section they illustrate rather than overlapping two sections. Quite a few images in this article overlap two sections or subsections. Some like File:Teppo works up a sweat in early Spring.jpg displace section heads or edit buttons. Most of these problems can be fixed by re-locating the images up or down or to the opposite side of the page. In some cases, it may be necessary to combine two short subsections to make room for an image.

Currently editing on a mini lappy, or a cellphone. Will ask fellow editors to tweak this. Pitke (talk) 18:58, 25 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

It's a good idea to position directional images so that they face into the page rather than out. For example, File:Finnhorse jumping.jpg would be better if positioned on the left since it faces right.

IMO the placing is perfect, but the direction unfortunate. Thinking of mirroring the file. Pitke (talk) 18:58, 25 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

"distinct breed begins at the turn of the 13th century" - Combinations like "13th century" should be held together by no-break codes to keep the elements from being separated by line-break on computer screens. WP:NBSP has details. This issue might not arise at WP:GAN but almost certainly will if you eventually take this to FAC. Another combination that needs a no-break code is "X percent", where X stands for any number.

Done Pitke (talk) 18:58, 25 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

WP:MOS#Bulleted and numbered lists suggests turning lists into straight prose where feasible. The list in the "Breed characteristics" section would be fine as straight prose, I think.

IMO again, it's better as a list. Will bring to discussion on the talk page. Pitke (talk) 18:58, 25 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

When entering a series of citations such as [56][9] in the "Riding horse type" section, arrange them in ascending order; i.e., [9][56].

Done Pitke (talk) 18:58, 25 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Captions consisting solely of a sentence fragment don't take a terminal period. An example would be "Finnish horses and a horse-drawn tram in Turku, 1890." Just remove the terminal period from this one and others like it.

Done Pitke (talk) 18:58, 25 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The Manual of Style advises against repeating the main words of the title in the heads and subheads. For this reason, I'd change "Pony-sized Finnhorse" to "Pony-sized" and "The Finnhorse today" to something like "21st century"

Done, except for "Early history" which has no elegant equivalent. Pitke (talk) 18:58, 25 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Too many short sections and subsections gives an article a choppy look. I would consider combining some of the short subsections in the "Uses" section.

Pressed for time, I did not check all of the image licenses. My spot check of a few found no problems.

Trotter type

"As of 2010, the official Finnish record for mares, and the world record for coldblood mares, is 1:20.2aly, ," - It's not clear what "1:20.2aly" means or what kind of mistake (typo?) caused it. Ditto for "1:19.4aly".

Would linking the times to a Harness racing in Finland article with explanations be enough or do they need to be explained in the text? Pitke (talk) 18:58, 25 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The Finnhorse today

"Today, most Finnhorses are bred to be trotters, but the breed is also popular at riding schools and for recreational riding." - I'd merge this one-sentence orphan paragraph with the one below it, and I'd replace the word "today" with "In the 21st century". Ditto for a similar use of "today" in the "Uses" section.

Done Pitke (talk) 18:58, 25 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Notes

I'd eliminate the nested parentheses in "(in (Finnish))" and simply use "(in Finnish)" rather than the template that creates the double nesting.

Done Pitke (talk) 18:58, 25 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The date formatting in the notes and references should be consistent. For example, citations 32 and 33 use different formats. Make them all the same.

Done Pitke (talk) 18:58, 25 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

References

The items are almost but not quite alphabetical by last name. Saastamoinen should be moved down.

Done Pitke (talk) 18:58, 25 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I'd simply use "(in Finnish)" rather than the template that creates the double nesting.

Done Pitke (talk) 18:58, 25 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The book data should include place of publication. If you don't have this information in your notes, you can usually find it via WorldCat.

Done Pitke (talk) 19:30, 25 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

For books without ISBNs, you can usually add OCLC numbers, also available via WorldCat.

Arppe and Roiha not found. Pitke (talk) 19:30, 25 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Other

The dab checker in the toolbox at the top of this review page finds three links that go to disambiguation pages instead of their intended targets.

Done Pitke (talk) 18:58, 25 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I hope these suggestions prove helpful. If so, please consider commenting on any other article at WP:PR. I don't usually watch the PR archives or make follow-up comments. If my suggestions are unclear, please ping me on my talk page. Finetooth (talk) 23:55, 24 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Pitke, I think there are some good comments here, holler if you need me or Dana to help -- Dana is suburb on the formatting stuff. I also agree that the race times are total greek (or Finnish) to an English speaker... After a year on this article, and you explaining it to me a couple times, I'm still not sure what 1:20.2aly means. We usually use the format minutes:seconds.faction of second to describe times and then note the distance. As in: "one mile in 1:34" or "1:34 for the mile." Montanabw^(talk) 19:34, 25 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Some requests at the Finnhorse talk page. Pitke (talk) 19:43, 25 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]