 | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||
| |||||||||||
Excuse me, but why is this not neutral? All of the information about this horse (scanty at best) agrees with the material and words like "great" have been used about the horse not only during his life but for the hundred and some odd years since his death. Kindly identify and explain yourself. Ki Longfellow 23:24, 10 March 2006 (UTC)
It just occurs to me...you think it isn't neutral because the horse is named Longfellow and my last name is Longfellow, so I am just naturally biased towards my 'relatives"? Ki Longfellow 23:26, 10 March 2006 (UTC)
- No, the language in this article just needs to be cleaned up to conform more the the encyclopedia's standards. Much of the praising language in this article (ie, "great", "extraordinary", ect) is innapropriate. --InShaneee 23:30, 10 March 2006 (UTC)
Aha. A reply. Great is not inappropriate. It's used in very dry horseracing tomes all the time to distinguish a normal racehorse from a great racehorse. But I will remove extraordinary...simply used it for a change of pace. Thanks for the help. Ki Longfellow 00:46, 11 March 2006 (UTC)
This is a very poor article. I've toned down some of the pov, put in proper headings and put the refs in-line. But there are still huge sections of unreferenced material. Tigerboy1966 18:05, 12 August 2012 (UTC)