Misplaced Pages

Talk:Golden Retriever: Difference between revisions

Article snapshot taken from[REDACTED] with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.
Browse history interactively← Previous editNext edit →Content deleted Content addedVisualWikitext
Revision as of 03:41, 3 February 2022 editTbhotch (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users, Page movers, File movers, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers314,221 editsm Reverted 1 edit by 2601:14A:4100:810:489C:9B37:A502:A0E3 (talk) to last revision by DYKUpdateBotTags: Twinkle Undo← Previous edit Revision as of 05:00, 7 February 2022 edit undoAtsme (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users, Page movers, New page reviewers, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers42,820 edits →Copyvio?: new sectionNext edit →
Line 60: Line 60:
==Did you know nomination== ==Did you know nomination==
{{Template:Did you know nominations/Golden Retriever}} {{Template:Did you know nominations/Golden Retriever}}

== Copyvio? ==

Calvaryman, why did Earwig return a in an article that was recently promoted to GA? ] ] ] 05:00, 7 February 2022 (UTC)

Revision as of 05:00, 7 February 2022

Good articlesGolden Retriever 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.
Review: January 13, 2022. (Reviewed version).
This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Golden Retriever article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.
Article policies
Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL
Archives: 1Auto-archiving period: 2 months 

Template:Vital article

WikiProject iconDogs GA‑class Mid‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Dogs, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles related to Canidae and commonly referred to as "dogs" and of which the domestic dog is but one of its many members, on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.DogsWikipedia:WikiProject DogsTemplate:WikiProject DogsDogs
GAThis article has been rated as GA-class on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale.
MidThis article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
WikiProject Dogs To-do:

Here are some tasks you can do to help with WikiProject Dogs:

A fact from Golden Retriever appeared on Misplaced Pages's Main Page in the Did you know column on 3 February 2022 (check views). The text of the entry was as follows: A record of the entry may be seen at Misplaced Pages:Recent additions/2022/February. The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Golden Retriever.

Semi-protected edit request on 25 November 2021

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

The line X "The Golden Retriever is a medium-large gun dog that was bred to retrieve shot waterfowl, such as ducks and upland game birds, during hunting and shooting parties." Is incorrect. They weren't bred for waterfowl, which is one of the reasons goldens often show an aversion to holding and carrying ducks. Instead they were bred for upland game and deer. The source, directly from the Guisachan, the brith place of the Golden Retriever. Should be Y "The Guisachan dogs were bred to be strong working dogs hunting grouse, partridge and deer." https://friendsofguisachan.org/main/guisachan-dogs/ Jhanlauf (talk) 17:54, 25 November 2021 (UTC)

 Done - PianoDan (talk) 18:15, 25 November 2021 (UTC)

WP:NOTGUIDE Re-phrase the last sentence of Health and lifespan section

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

The last sentence of the section Health and Lifespan currently reads as follows:

"Puppies should eat about three cups of food a day and adults three to five cups, depending on the food and how active the dog is."

Wiki-content should not be phrased like this as it will contradict WP:NOTGUIDE. Rather, the sentence, I propose, should be edited as follows:

"Puppies are recommended to be fed 3 cups of food a day and adults are recommended to be fed 3-5 cups, depending on the food and how active the dog is."

The current version sounds as an advice from Misplaced Pages itself while Misplaced Pages does not advice anything. It can just narrate the consensus on what is advised. --81.213.215.83 (talk) 05:59, 17 December 2021 (UTC)

Hello IP, I agree the section was terribly worded and worse, terribly or unsourced. I have stripped it of everything unsourced or uniquely cited to unreliable sources. Cavalryman (talk) 07:04, 17 December 2021 (UTC).
Hello, thank you, Cavalryman. I saw the current version and it seems it would be better if the content of the section "Common health problems" are merged into the "Health and Lifespan" section. Those two sentences can be merged into a single section though I would say even the current version does not have problem. --81.213.215.83 (talk) 18:25, 17 December 2021 (UTC)

GA Review

GA toolbox
Reviewing
This review is transcluded from Talk:Golden Retriever/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Kpddg (talk · contribs) 14:58, 7 January 2022 (UTC)


Hello Cavalryman. I will be be GA reviewing this article in the coming days. Please contact me for any problems. Thank You. Kpddg 14:58, 7 January 2022 (UTC)

Section-wise Assessment

Lead Section

  • Lead section is fine

History

 Done although I am keen to the thoughts of a second reviewer. 9 Jan 22.
  • 'Prior to the publication Marjoribanks' meticulously' Why is there an apostrophe after his name?
minus Removed, it has been reworded. 9 Jan 22.
  • 'Prior to the publication Marjoribanks' meticulously maintained and very detailed stud book in 1952, a number of romantic tales were published stating the breed descends from among other things a troupe of Russian circus dogs that performed in Brighton in the 1860s, but the records tell a different story.' Revise this sentence; it is difficult to understand
 Done, I have cut half of the sentence away. 9 Jan 22.
  • 'In the 1860s Marjoribanks set out with a complicated line breeding plan in mind to create what to his mind was the ultimate breed of retriever at his Scottish estate Guisachan.' This sentence is again too long and complicated.
 Done, with a complicated line breeding plan in mind has been removed. 9 Jan 22.
  • 'It is the pedigree of Nous that became the source for the romantic tales of the Golden Retriever's heritage, one early account claimed he was purchased from a Russian circus trainer in Brighton, another account claimed a cobbler in Brighton, and yet another claimed a gypsy; but Marjoribanks' stud book states Nous was a Flat-coated Retriever bred by Lord Chichester on his nearby Stanmer Park estate.' Same problem as above
 Done, sentence split. 9 Jan 22.
  • This section needs a lot of revision. The prose and sentence-formation is too complicated and long. It includes too much complex detail. This can be confusing for many readers.
Question? I have made a number of amendments, I would appreciate the thoughts of a second reviewer. 9 Jan 22.

Description

Appearance
  • The Kennel Club has been linked too many times. No need to link it here in the first sentence.
 Done. 8 Jan 22.
  • 'The coat's colour can be any shade of cream, yellow or golden, the Kennel Club's breed standard states red or mahogany are prohibited but a few white hairs on the chest are permitted.' Once again, sentence is long and complex
 Done. 8 Jan 22.
  • 'As Golden Retrievers age their coats typically lighten in colour.' Add comma after age.
 Done. 8 Jan 22.
  • This section's prose too has to be made a lot better.
Question? I believe I have cleared it up. 8 Jan 22.
Temperament
  • 'This means that they are typically a year older than Labradors when they are ready to be used as gundogs in the field.'
 Done. 8 Jan 22.
  • 'The Golden Retriever is one of the Western world's most recognisable and poplar companion dog breeds, regularly being ranked in the top five dog breeds by a number of registrations in the United Kingdom, the United States, Australia and Canada.'
 Not done I am happy to discuss alternate wording but I am not sure that is an improvement. 8 Jan 22.

Popularity and Uses

  • Golden Retriever is not mentioned in reference 13
checkY That is my mistake, I was juggling multiple alternate sources and I clearly selected the wrong one, it is interesting that it contradicts other sources. I have added a new source. 8 Jan 22.
  • 'Compared to other retriever breeds, the Golden Retriever is not considered a particularly strong swimmer, because of their long coats they tend to sit quite low in the water and they are considered less suited as a wildfowl hunting dog than it is for retrieving land-based gamebirds like grouse and partridge.' Shorten sentence
 Done. 8 Jan 22.
  • 'One reason the breed is less popular than the Labrador for field use is they are generally slower to mature; when a Golden Retriever is still in basic training a Labrador may have already had a season in the field.' Sentence can be formatted in a better way
 Done. 8 Jan 22.
  • 'Additionally it can be hard for sportsmen to find pups bred from proven working lines because of the far greater numbers Golden Retrievers bred as pets or for the show ring.' Improve.
 Done. 8 Jan 22.

Health

  • Fine after I corrected a couple of minor grammatical errors

Notable Golden Retrievers

  • Put the two different dogs in different bullet points
 Done. 8 Jan 22.

Final Decision

Given the issues raised in the above review, this article requires significant editing and updating before it can be considered again for GA status. I doubt whether this can be done in a few days. Rrefer to other similar good articles as well. So please do re-nominate once all the issues are resolved. Thank You. Kpddg 10:12, 8 January 2022 (UTC)

GA review
(see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)
  1. It is reasonably well written.
    a (prose, spelling, and grammar):
    b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):
  2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.
    a (references):
    b (citations to reliable sources):
    c (OR):
    d (copyvio and plagiarism):
  3. It is broad in its coverage.
    a (major aspects):
    b (focused):
  4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.
    Fair representation without bias:
  5. It is stable.
    No edit wars, etc.:
  6. It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate.
    a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales):
    b (appropriate use with suitable captions):

Overall:
Fail:

· · ·


This article is failed.

Second opinion requested

I feel a second review is warranted from an experienced editor as no opportunity was afforded to rectify the issues raised. Per discussion at WT:Good article nominations#Second opinion requested: Golden Retriever I have reopened this review. Cavalryman (talk) 00:10, 9 January 2022 (UTC).

I have made significant amendments to the article to rectify the issues raised by the previous reviewer. On their TP they have committed to not review any more GANs until they have gained some experience on the project . Cavalryman (talk) 23:55, 10 January 2022 (UTC).
I think you should simply open a new nomination: insert a fresh nomination template as if you would nominate it for the first time, and change the page parameter to "2" so that it is on a separate page. The way you do it now is out of process and might cause technical problems. --Jens Lallensack (talk) 20:51, 11 January 2022 (UTC)
Jens Lallensack, I agree that would probably be the easiest course of action, but per the discussion at WT:Good article nominations/Archive 25#Another new reviewer causing problems (about the same reviewer) I feel that would be endorsing the first review. So, as with Talk:George H. W. Bush broccoli comments/GA1, I would like this article to be judged on its merits. Kind regards, Cavalryman (talk) 21:11, 11 January 2022 (UTC).
Ah I see. I may take this over, and will proceed tomorrow. --Jens Lallensack (talk) 21:27, 11 January 2022 (UTC)
Many thanks. Kind regards, Cavalryman (talk) 21:32, 11 January 2022 (UTC).
  • with some infusions of Red Setter, Labrador Retriever and Bloodhound blood. – I'm worried that people may take this literally. It might be safer to reformulate?
 Removed.
  • In 1903 the Kennel Club recorded the first examples, they were recorded in the same register as the Flat-coats. – the prose is not great; at the very least, we need a ";" (or, alternatively, a "–") instead of ","
 Reworked I have reworked the sentence to In 1903 the Kennel Club recorded the first examples, listing them in the same register as Flat-coats.
  • In 1911 a breed club was formed for the breed and they were given a new name, the 'Yellow or Golden Retriever', from this point they were seen as a separate breed from the Flat-coated Retriever – This seems a bit weak. First, it is very unspecific (which breed club? where?), and second, the second part is obviously not correct because the Kennel Club didn't follow it?
 Reworked I have added the breed club’s name and location and added increasingly to the second half of the sentence. It is not unusual for a kennel club to lag a little behind popular understanding but please let me know if you would like it further reworked.
  • In 1920 the 'Yellow or' was dropped from the breed's became known as the 'Golden Retriever' colloquially, or the 'Retriever (Golden)' to the Kennel Club. – Something missing here?
 Reworked I have removed the entire reference to the Kennel Club using an archaic internal naming process, it extends well beyond this breed and I agree, it just adds confusion.
  • Mrs – we usually don't use such attributes in Misplaced Pages.
 Removed, I had thought twice about including it and initially decided to because literally every mention in every source I have seen, both cited here and not included, includes the “Mrs”.
  • One early enthusiast of the breed, Mrs Winifred Charlesworth – this paragraph needs dates.
 Done
  • Golden Retriever's good looks – remove the "good", which is puffery.
 Removed
  • The Canadian Kennel Club recognised the breed in 1927, the American Kennel Club in 1932, the first examples were registered in France in 1934 and Australia in 1937. – In various places, including here after "1932", I think there should be a ; instead of a , because what follows is basically a separate sentence.
 Done
  • suffer the misfortunes – could be more specific: what kind of misfortunes?
 Done have added due to British wartime restrictions on the breeding of larger dogs to the sentence
  • The coat's colour can be any shade of cream, yellow or gold, as they age their coats typically become lighter in colour. – another example where ; is needed instead of ,
 Done
  • Originally only yellow or golden coloured examples were permitted, this excluded many outstanding cream coloured dogs so in 1936 the Kennel Club's standard was amended to include the cream colour – Again interpunctation problems here. To achieve better connection of the sentence parts, you could do something like: "Originally only yellow or golden coloured examples were permitted, but this excluded many outstanding cream coloured dogs, which is why in 1936 the Kennel Club's standard was amended to include the cream colour".
 Reworked, please let me know if you think it needs further reworking.
  • avoid single-sentence paragraphs.
 Fixed, I have reordered the last three sentences making the second paragraph two sentences. I don’t think much would be lost by merging the sentences if you feel that would be an improvement.
  • less suited for wildfowl hunting dog – "dog" too much?
 Removed and reworked that is an obvious error I missed in proof reading.
  • Compared to other retriever breeds, the Golden Retriever is not considered a particularly strong swimmer, due to the breed's long coat they tend to sit quite low in the water when swimming. – Again, either use a ; or reformulate using "because" or similar.
 Reworked.
  • One reason is the breed is generally quite slow to mature, – needs a "that"
 Added.
  • which requires a great deal more maintenance –> "which requires more maintenance" certainly makes the point already
 Removed
  • than that of the Labrador's – no "'s"
 Removed
  • There seems to be a difference between the "American Golden Retriever", "British Golden Retriever", and "Canadian Golden Retriever". I don't find a mention here?
Question? probably the most extensive secondary source cited, Jones & Hamilton, says The Golden Retriever Standard adopted by the British Kennel Club is accepted the world over, except in the U.S.A. and Canada, where a Golden is somewhat larger than in Britain and the cream color is still not allowable, but otherwise is basically the same. I think that is reflected in the article. I have seen some references in unreliable sources and the article before I started rewriting it included large sections about these various lines, but again they were unreliably sourced (or unsourced). Unless I can find a quality secondary source that states these distinctions and terminology exist I think it should be excluded.
  • In conclusion, the article needs a bit of work to reach criterion 1 "well written"; see examples above. But I also think it is not too far from reaching this standard. If you could give the article a copy edit with above concerns in mind, that would be great. --Jens Lallensack (talk) 20:51, 12 January 2022 (UTC)
Jens, I think I have addressed all of your points above, additionally Justlettersandnumbers made a number of welcome amendments, please let me know if there is any further aspects you would like addressed. Kind regards, Cavalryman (talk) 04:29, 13 January 2022 (UTC).
Thanks for the fixes, looks good now, promoting! --Jens Lallensack (talk) 20:38, 13 January 2022 (UTC)
Jens Lallensack, thank you very much for undertaking the review and for your excellent points, the article is improved as a result. Kind regards, Cavalryman (talk) 20:59, 13 January 2022 (UTC).

References

  1. Jones, Arthur F.; Hamilton, Ferelith (1971). The world encyclopedia of dogs. New York: Galahad Books. p. 237. ISBN 0-88365-302-8.

Further improvement

Congrats to Cavalryman and others who helped bring this to GA, great work! Now that that's done, it seems to me that some further improvement could be made without too much further effort. In a spirit of constructive criticism, here are a few things that strike me at once:

  • 'nous' is Ancient Greek, not Gaelic (though of course the Gaels may use it, as the Brits commonly do)
  • the History section would probably be easier to read if it were as strictly chronological as possible; the myths and misconceptions of the past are of fairly limited interest in the present
  • the stuff about unscrupulous breeders in the Health section is (a) far from neutral in tone and (b) pretty much generic and equally (if not more) applicable to many other breeds.

Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 16:58, 15 January 2022 (UTC)

Justlettersandnumbers, sorry I missed this comment as the lowercase sigmabot got in behind you.
  • the cited source states 'nous' is Gaelic for wisdom, but it could very easily be mistaken. That chapter is primarily about the deliberate development of breeds and uses the Golden Retriever’s well chronicled beginnings to illustrate its point, they could easily have been mistaken about the name’s origins.
  • I am keen to retain some mention about the myths and misconceptions because they still crop up in sources and they were (until recently) included in this article and elsewhere.
  • Agree, I was never really happy with that sentence.
Kind regards, Cavalryman (talk) 04:14, 18 January 2022 (UTC).
No problem, Cavalryman, I don't see any great urgency here now that the GA review is done. Numbering the three points I raised:
  1. for that I think we would need a speaker of Scots Gaelic. Akerbeltz, I seem to remember that you are one such; can you shed any light on Gaelic use of 'nous'?
  2. ah, yes, I see! Indeed, I agree that that should most definitely be included in some detail – though still perhaps all in one place? I can see nothing to suggest that this is a WP:RS (unless it is a translation of one), but it is well written and clearly explains some history, all completely new to me. I'll redirect the "Russian tracker" page here in a moment.
  3. I might have a go at that later today.
Regards, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 10:37, 18 January 2022 (UTC)
Sure :) So nous is not a likely candidate for anything to do with Gaelic, first and foremost because -ou- is not a legitimate letter combination in Gaelic. But even if you consider it to be poor spelling, nothing seems to fit, even if I consider meanings other then wisdom/knowledge. The only thing even vaguely close is a variant spelling of the hero-name Naoise which occasionally crops up as Naos or, if there's a letter missing at the end, a snipe (the bird, naosg) but neither of these look likely candidates. I don't think this is Gaelic at all but the fairly obvious English (<Greek) https://en.wiktionary.org/nous I have heard people described as having nous, and I could easily see a dog owner applying that to a clever dog, but I can't prove that of course. But it's almost certainly not Scots or Irish Gaelic. Hope that helps! Akerbeltz (talk) 11:07, 18 January 2022 (UTC)
Akerbeltz many thanks. Justlettersandnumbers I think it’s safest to just remove it. Kind regards, Cavalryman (talk) 11:13, 18 January 2022 (UTC).

Did you know nomination

The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Misplaced Pages talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was: promoted by DanCherek (talk) 15:29, 29 January 2022 (UTC)

( ) Golden RetrieverGolden Retriever

Improved to Good Article status by Cavalryman (talk). Self-nominated at 03:43, 18 January 2022 (UTC).

General: Article is new enough and long enough
Policy: Article is sourced, neutral, and free of copyright problems
Hook: Hook has been verified by provided inline citation
Image: Image is freely licensed, used in the article, and clear at 100px.
QPQ: Done.

Overall: article is interesting, gained a GA on the 13th January 2022. No Copyvio. The hooks source is not accessible but I found several sources that gave me the same info. Hook is interesting, Pic in public domain and clear, qpq done, as to me ALT1 is good to go. Paradise Chronicle (talk) 01:25, 19 January 2022 (UTC)

I'll review this one. For now I like ALT1.Paradise Chronicle (talk) 21:17, 18 January 2022 (UTC)
Golden RetrieverGolden Retriever
  • @Paradise Chronicle and Cavalryman: hi there! This is an exciting one, as animal photos always make for excellent internet fodder; however, I can't verify the hook's licensing from the source provided (here is an archived link)—there doesn't seem to be a public domain release of any kind. I do see that it was uploaded by a user of the same name, but given that they haven't edited since 2007, I'd rather not take my chances on them submitting a ticket. Could we substitute it for the image there in both the article and infobox? I happen to think it works just as well, if not better :) thanks in advance! theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (they/she) 10:22, 24 January 2022 (UTC)
As for me that's fine. But let's wait for what cavalryman answers. They probably know a bit more about how a real Golden Retriever should be presented to the public.Paradise Chronicle (talk) 14:55, 24 January 2022 (UTC)
Nous, sittingNous, sitting
Theleekycauldron, apologies for the late response. I too went through the processes with that photo when deciding if it was appropriate to take to GAR, in the end I decided it was but I appreciate your apprehension. I would oppose this new photo being placed in the infobox, if does not give an appropriate appreciation of the breed’s characteristics, but we could place it somewhere else in the article or find another photo. It is a shame this photo isn’t higher quality as it would go with the remaining hook. I will look for some other options. Kind regards, Cavalryman (talk) 21:58, 24 January 2022 (UTC).
@Cavalryman: I see, fair enough—any chance you want to put that photo somewhere else in the article? (also, looks like you've got curly apostrophes enabled—might want to turn those off, since they're not usable in articles) theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (they/she) 00:19, 25 January 2022 (UTC)
Golden RetrieverGolden Retriever Golden RetrieverGolden Retriever
Theleekycauldron, if you could tell me how to disable curly apostrophes on my ipad I would be eternally grateful, in article space I usually resort to italicising the 's' then deleting the additional apostrophes, in talk space I just don’t bother any more.
I will look at where it could be placed, although what are your thoughts about either of these two which are in the article already? Cavalryman (talk) 00:48, 25 January 2022 (UTC).
For the hook, I'd chose the Golden Retriever in action.Paradise Chronicle (talk) 01:01, 25 January 2022 (UTC)
I agree with PC—the one with the game bird is much more compelling. @Cavalryman: you'll want to go to Settings > General > Keyboard and turn off the slider that reads "smart punctuation". theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (they/she) 01:16, 25 January 2022 (UTC)
Fantastic, we have a solution. Re apostrophes thank you very much, it's (← it worked) been a thorn in my side for some time. Cavalryman (talk) 01:21, 25 January 2022 (UTC).
Paradise Chronicle, I have just realised I never thanked your for the review, thank you very much. Kind regards, Cavalryman (talk) 05:43, 25 January 2022 (UTC).

Promoting ALT1 to Prep 3 with image. DanCherek (talk) 15:29, 29 January 2022 (UTC)

Copyvio?

Calvaryman, why did Earwig return a 74.6% possibility of a copyvio in an article that was recently promoted to GA? Atsme 💬 📧 05:00, 7 February 2022 (UTC)

Categories:
Talk:Golden Retriever: Difference between revisions Add topic