Talk:Blacklock (horse)

GA Review

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

Reviewer: The Rambling Man (talk · contribs) 17:00, 2 July 2013 (UTC)

Comments

• " in three starts. In his first start..." a bit repetitive.
  • Done
• If the "Gascoigne Stakes" and "Dundas Stakes" are significant enough to be singled out for inclusion in the lead, why aren't they linked? (Even red-linked?) Are they really that notable?
  • Linked, but not vital, can remove if you like.
• I would link "stallion" in the lead.
  • Done
• Nothing at all about his death? Especially as we have a very specific date of death.
  • Added where he died and the fact it was instantaneous, but not sure what else I could say.
• "racing career" is repeated in consecutive sentences.
  • Fixed
• Infobox: the "Record" says "23: 17-4-1", but that's not obvious to non-experts. I'm guessing it's 23 races, 17 wins, 4 seconds and 1 third, but I'm not sure. I'd also use en-dash to separate the numbers rather than hyphens.
  • Yes, that's correct. added dashes in and a sentence at the end of the racing career section to clarify.
• " won a few races in" -> "a few" is a little colloquial for an encyclopaedia.
  • Changed to won a number of races a little more formal.
• "a good looking horse" -> "good-looking".
  • Done
• " in a sweepstakes of" suitable link for this?
  • Added a link to Thoroughbred horse racing#List of terms in.
• Similarly for "starting at a price of". Better to link that than the 3/1.
  • Done
• "(Harlequin)" worth a link.
  • Red linked
• Not entirely convinced a link to "jockey" is required.
  • Removed
• "He didn't arrive" avoid contractions.
  • Done
• "he had drifted out to as big as 10/1" poor, maybe "his odds had lengthened to as much as 10/1..."
  • Done
• "he had a gallop in the afternoon and he soon shortened back up it the betting" again, not brilliant but you could say "he had a gallop in the afternoon and soon shortened in the betting"?
  • Done
• "Two days later he ..." -> "Two days later Blacklock..."
  • Done
• "Later in the day he won.." again "Later in the day Blacklock won..." (just remember that if the last horse or person or whatever you mentioned wasn't Blacklock, you need to reinforce who "he" is when you start the next sentence by using his name rather than "he").
  • Done
• "a mile and a quarter" I would expect this to be hyphenated.
  • Done
• "Blacklock didn't race again" avoid contractions.
  • Done
• Consider converting some of these Imperial distances for our European friends who have no concept of a "yard".
  • Put a metres conversion for the first instance of yard, furlong and mile.
• "Rasping finished second, St. Helena third, Mandeville fourth and Skipjack fifth." not really relevant.
  • Done
• "The same day he also walked over for a sweepstakes of 50 guineas each over the St. Leger course. The next day he beat Rasping to win a sweepstakes of 25 guineas each over four miles.[23] Later the same day..." too many "the xxx day" starting sentences here.
  • Reworded
• Race record table doesn't sort correctly for pretty much any column. For hints, see Oxbow (horse).
  • Don't know how I missed this in the first place, but it sorts correctly now
• " he was standing at" standing? Is this jargon?
  • Removed and reworded
• "3x4" we have a multiplication sign to use instead of an x.
  • Done
• Avoid SHOUTING in the ref titles.
  • Done
• Ref 1 title could use an en-dash rather than a hyphen.
  • Done;
• Refs which are re-used but just have different page numbers should be separated out.
  • Sorry, not sure exactly what you mean here. A separate bibliography??

The Rambling Man (talk) 17:20, 2 July 2013 (UTC)

On hold "good article" nomination

This article is on hold per its good article nomination. This is how the article, as of July 2, 2013, compares against the six good article criteria:

1. Well written?: Several issues as noted above.

2. Factually accurate?: No problems with that.

3. Broad in coverage?: To an extent, although some points noted above, especially regarding the death.

4. Neutral point of view?: No issues.

5. Article stability?: Yes.

6. Images?: No worries.

When these issues are addressed, I'll re-review once you notify me. Thank you for your work so far. The Rambling Man (talk) 17:20, 2 July 2013 (UTC)