Talk:Parson Russell Terrier/GA1

GA Review

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch

Reviewer: Dana boomer (talk) 20:48, 22 December 2010 (UTC)

Hi! I'll be reviewing this article for GA status, and should have the full review up shortly. Dana boomer (talk) 20:48, 22 December 2010 (UTC)

GA review (see here for criteria)

1. It is reasonably well written.

   a (prose): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):

   • The ANKC link in the infobox is dead.
   • Lead, "it conforms to a smaller range of sizes than the Jack Russell". Does this mean that the range is smaller or that or that the sizes are smaller? I see that you say later that it means the range is smaller, but you should probably clarify this in the lead. It might be easy to do this by saying "The Parsons tends to be larger than the Jack Russell, although the Russell has a larger range of sizes" or something of the sort.
   • History, second paragraph. The first two sentences leave me very confused as to what a badger club (were they hunting badgers?) has to do with terriers, and why it would be renamed from a "badger club" to a "terrier club". Give the reader a bit more background here, please.
   • History, "The Jack Russell Terrier Club of Great Britain was established in 1974 as the parent club for the Jack Russell Terrier in the UK, which actively opposed recognition by Kennel Club (UK)." Huh? What do you mean by "which actively opposed recogniition by..." The Terrier Club was opposing something? The Kennel Club was opposing something?
   • History, "The American Kennel Club updated the name from Jack Russell Terrier on 1 April 2003." To what? The Parson Russel Terrier? Did they keep a section for the Jack Russell, as other clubs did?
   • Description, "either smooth or broken." Could the non-dog reader get a hint of what a broken coat is here?
   • Description, "with only a hint of eyebrows and beard if natural to the coat." What do you mean "if natural to the coat"?
   • Description, third paragraph. Is there a suggestion as to how big the judge's hands should be? I mean, I'm a medium sized woman, but my hands are a good inch shorter from the base of my palm to the tip of my fingers than my husbands. So, between the two hands, my husband could "span" a dog a good 2-3 inches further around than I could, which is fairly significant when you're talking about a dog that only weighs 15 lbs. Or is it just a general measurement, like how in measuring horses a "hand" is four inches - no more, no less?
   • Temperament, "At work, they can be single minded, tenacious and courageous " What is "work" for these dogs today?

2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.

   a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):

3. It is broad in its coverage.

   a (major aspects): b (focused):

   • See my query about what "work" is for them in the prose section above.

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):

7. Overall:

   Pass/Fail:

Overall a nice little article about a dog breed that I hadn't heard of before. However, I have a few questions above about prose and completeness. The main issue is the inclusion of jargon ("broken coat", "spanning", etc) that isn't familiar to those who aren't involved in the pure-bred dog world (like me!). Most of the issues are not significant however, and shouldn't take long to fix. Please let me know if you have any questions, I'll be watchlisting this page. Dana boomer (talk) 21:22, 22 December 2010 (UTC)

I'll respond down here as I don't want to mess up the formatting. :). So far: fixed the ANKC link; changed the lead sentence to "narrower" rather than smaller; given more background regarding the badger point; corrected the grammar in the opposed recognition part; added a line to say that the ANKC and the NZKC are the only two major kennel clubs to recognise both the JRT and the PRT in order to clarify the AKC line. Miyagawa (talk) 22:07, 22 December 2010 (UTC)

Ok, I think I've fixed the remaining points. In summary; added explanation of a broken coat (with cite); changed natural to the coat to "if broken coated" as they wouldn't appear in smooth coated dogs; managed to find an explanation of spanning terriers - I thought it was for size too, but apparently a judge is feeling for shape (with cite); modified to say the standard described them as such - as typically this breed doesn't work anymore, which in fact one of the national breed club says on its front page (cited as such). Miyagawa (talk) 22:34, 22 December 2010 (UTC)

I've made a couple more tweaks. Other than that, everything looks good, so I'm passing the article to GA status. Nice work, and thanks for the quick response! Dana boomer (talk) 00:15, 23 December 2010 (UTC)