Talk:Belted Galloway

Belted Galloway has been listed as one of the Agriculture, food and drink 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.
Review: August 26, 2015. (Reviewed version).

Agriculture: Livestock Low‑importance

	Agriculture portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Agriculture, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of agriculture on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.AgricultureWikipedia:WikiProject AgricultureTemplate:WikiProject AgricultureAgriculture articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by the Livestock task force (assessed as Low-importance).

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Wugapodes (talk · contribs) 01:11, 8 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Reviewing. The article's short so I should be back within the hour. Wugapodes (talk) 01:11, 8 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Checklist

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria

Is it reasonably well written?
A. Prose is "clear and concise", without copyvios, or spelling and grammar errors:

B. MoS compliance for lead, layout, words to watch, fiction, and lists:
Is it factually accurate and verifiable?
A. Has an appropriate reference section:

B. Cites reliable sources, where necessary:

C. No original research:
Is it broad in its coverage?
A. Major aspects:

B. Focused (see summary style):
Is it neutral?
Fair representation without bias:
Is it stable?
No edit wars, etc:
Does it contain images to illustrate the topic?
A. Images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid fair use rationales are provided for non-free content:

B. Images are provided if possible and are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions:
Overall:
Pass or Fail:

Comments

"which means there are fewer than 2,500 annual registrations in the United States and a global population of less than 10,000" is not supported by the citation.
Addressed and corrected; sourced. TheMagikCow (talk) 08:00, 25 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
"In 2007 they were formally removed from the UK Rare Breeds Survival Trust's watch list, having recovered sufficiently from the devastation of the foot and mouth crisis of the early 2000s, to have reached in excess of 1500 registered breeding females" is not supported by the citation following it.
Sourced. TheMagikCow (talk) 08:17, 25 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
"enabling the breed to happily overwinter outside" First, "happily" is a little much. The source doesn't talk about how the cow feels outside, and it just seems unencyclopedic and editorial in context. The second problem is that I think overwinter may not be immediately apparent to all readers and it would probably be more clear to say something like "to spend the winter outside".
Rephrased to make it more readable. TheMagikCow (talk) 13:49, 25 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
What is a "Dun"? Is it a different breed? Is it a color? What's the color like? It's not explained or linked anywhere so I'm very unclear about what it means.
Sorted with a note and explanation. TheMagikCow (talk) 08:00, 25 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
"A female Belted Galloway cannot be registered in the Herd Book if it has white above the dewclaw other than the belt, but can be registered in the Appendix. A bull can only be registered in the Herd book if it has no other white than the belt" These sentences are not supported by the citation that follows them.
Sourced. TheMagikCow (talk) 13:49, 25 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
"a mutation in the PMEL gene" PMEL should be wikilinked if it has an article (or if it should).
Wikilinked to existing page. TheMagikCow (talk) 08:01, 25 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
"the average being 1,800 pounds" I'm not sure if the use of "average" here (and in the following sentence) is supported by the source. "Average" to me implies a arithmetic mean, but the source doesn't say what "weighing around" means, if it's a median, mean, or something else. I'd suggest staying away from "average" here since the source doesn't use it because it does have a very specific meaning.
Clarified by using usual and around. TheMagikCow (talk) 08:21, 25 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
"Calves generally weigh from 40 pounds to 60 pounds" neither source states the weight of a calf.
Sourced. TheMagikCow (talk) 08:59, 25 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
"strong maternal instinct" the use of "strong" here isn't supported by the sources and seems editorial. It implies that their maternal instinct is stronger than normal and that just isn't supported by the sources.
Agreed. TheMagikCow (talk) 08:59, 25 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
"They are well-suited for rough grazing land and will utilize coarse grasses other breeds would shun. They are able to maintain good condition on less than ideal pasture, and produce a high quality beef product on grass alone." This is not supported by the source.
Re used source 4: see section characteristics. TheMagikCow (talk) 08:55, 26 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Citation style should be consistent. See WP:CITESTYLE.
Sites that are linked to in the references section shouldn't be in the external links section. See WP:ELLAYOUT

Results

On Hold for 7 days. There are really major sourcing issues with this article, and I think it is rather far from satisfying criterion 2. However, I'm guessing that you got those statements from somewhere for how detailed they are, and you could probably find them again. Otherwise they need to be removed. I'll give you 7 days to fix the citation problems, if you think it might take longer, we can talk about an extension.Wugapodes (talk) 01:56, 8 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you very much. Unfortunately I am on holiday without a computer and mobile would be nigh on impossible to promote this article. As soon as I get back (2 weeks) I will work. I don't mind if you fail and then archive and I will then re nominate. Thank you very much and sorry for the confusion. TheMagikCow (talk) 06:57, 8 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hold Extended until 25 August 2015 to allow the nominator time to address the issues. In the mean time I'm going to {{cn}} tag the sentences I think need addressed, and if someone fixes it in that time all the better. Enjoy your holiday. Wugapodes (talk) 02:56, 9 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hold Extended until 28 August. @TheMagikCow: Thanks for all the hard work right after your holiday. Everything done so far seems to be very good. Once item ten is addressed, it will be passed. Since you've been working on it, I have no problem extending the hold a bit longer for you to finish up that last point. Happy Editing! Wugapodes (talk) 18:41, 25 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you so much! Just finishing it now! TheMagikCow (talk) 08:50, 26 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

All done then! Thank you very much for your patience! TheMagikCow (talk) 08:55, 26 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Listed Wugapodes (talk) 19:34, 26 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Belted Galloway. 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, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

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) 12:56, 30 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Sources?

I'm adding content that could be useful with some sources... Belted Galloways, also informally known as Belties, The breed is raised in areas where the climate is similar to its native Scotland, like the Central Coast of California, and areas of the Appalachian mountains.^{[citation needed]} ,Bod (talk) 23:38, 18 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links

Would someone look at the "External links" section? I did not look or investigate any timelines and things can sometimes "creep in". There are currently eight links and this would be concerns of farming on far larger articles. Thank you, Otr500 (talk) 20:09, 9 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I've removed them for now, Otr500. We'll see if that "sticks" or not. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 20:49, 9 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

As I stated, I didn't look at them, I just know that I have seen good articles get downgraded (many times) over time by incremental additions that sometimes do not help an article so I agree, why have them. In in no way am I against "External links" but have noted that higher classed articles many times don't even have the section so excessive links (to me) can be negative. If some are added back, now that it has been brought up, I am sure it will be with some consideration which cannot hurt. Thank you, Otr500 (talk) 02:45, 10 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]