Talk:Pony of the Americas

	Pony of the Americas 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.
Article milestones Date Process Result May 18, 2012 Good article nominee Listed

This article is rated GA-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Equine Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Equine, a collaborative effort to improve Wikipedia's coverage of articles relating to horses, asses, zebras, hybrids, equine health, equine sports, etc. Please visit the project page for details or ask questions at the barn.EquineWikipedia:WikiProject EquineTemplate:WikiProject Equineequine articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. This article is supported by Horse breeds task force. United States Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions. Template Usage Articles Requested! Become a Member Project Talk Alerts United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

It is requested that an image or photograph of Better close up of pony without tack, also without clutter in fore- and background be included in this article to improve its quality. Please replace this template with a more specific media request template where possible. The Free Image Search Tool or Openverse Creative Commons Search may be able to locate suitable images on Flickr and other web sites.

Upload

This review is

transcluded from Talk:Pony of the Americas/GA1

. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Keilana (talk · contribs) 02:57, 15 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi! Here are my comments on this.

• Is "in the United States" necessary when linking to Iowa?

• I think so. I know that when you click on the Iowa link it immediately says it's a state in the US, but I'd prefer to lay this out up-front to readers, especially since it's not one of the more well-known states. Dana boomer (talk) 14:45, 15 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• That makes sense, leave it as is then.

• The phrase "and within 15 years has registered 12,500 ponies" is unclear.

• That was supposed to be "had"...oops. Does the change make it more clear, or do I need to rework the entire sentence? Dana boomer (talk) 14:45, 15 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• It's fine now, I get what you're saying.

• You're inconsistent with your use of the Oxford comma; if you like it, then you need a comma after "specific height", "muzzle", and "the refinement of the Arabian". I personally prefer it, so that's what I noticed. :)

• I looked through and couldn't find any places where I used the Oxford comma - could you please point them out? Dana boomer (talk) 14:45, 15 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• I must be crazy. O.o I could have sworn I saw a few. As long as you're consistent, I don't care - so you're good to go.

• Can you specify the "other disciplines" in the lead?

• Done. Dana boomer (talk) 14:45, 15 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• Much better. :)

• Reword "nor is ancestry (such as the American Paint Horse breed) indicative of pinto coloring"

• Done, better? Dana boomer (talk) 14:45, 15 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• Yeah, it's less clunky, but I still have no idea what the American Paint Horse has to do with any of this.

• Comment it's a horse people thing. Pinto/Paint patterns are often dominant over leopard spotting, so POA and Appaloosa people totally freak out about it. It's a huge deal to them that their horses do not carry even a hint of the Pinto/Paint patterns because of the genetic havoc they can wreak when breeding for the little leopard spots.

• You use both "it" and "they" to refer to the pony/breed, which is correct?

• This is always a bugaboo of mine. I reworked the physical characteristics section a bit - have I made it better or worse? Dana boomer (talk) 14:45, 15 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• Better! Nice job.

• Can you explain the "pony" vs. "horse" thing further? I'm not an equine enthusiast, sorry. <sheepish grin>

• I've added a bit here to show that the distinction is based on physical characteristics and size. I can add more if you'd like me to - just wasn't sure how deeply I should go in an individual breed article. Dana boomer (talk) 14:45, 15 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• It makes more sense now. Thanks for the gloss on phenotype - I didn't notice that missing as a science type! :)

• "Along with crosses between registered POAs..." is clunky, maybe more the Appaloosa/Arabian thing earlier?

• Rewritten this paragraph, see what you think... Dana boomer (talk) 14:45, 15 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• It's better, still a little hard to follow. I'm being picky though!

• Should "crosses to other breeds" be "crosses with other breeds"? What does the literature say?

• "with". Fixed. Dana boomer (talk) 14:45, 15 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• Is it "Arabian, Appaloosa, Shetland" or "Arabian/Appaloosa/Shetland"? You use both.

• Standardized. Dana boomer (talk) 14:45, 15 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• In "Over the years between the founding of the breed club and the present", remove "over the years" for clarity.

• Done. Dana boomer (talk) 14:45, 15 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• Why has the Shetland blood been bred out? I'm confused.

• To make the horse look more like the little stock horse type that the original breeder was breeding towards. Shetland ponies tend to be small and fat and hairy, which was definitely not what he was looking for :)

• Haha that explains so much! I like the way you explained it in the article without saying "fat and hairy" though.

• Just to clarify, it's a youth-oriented club because the pony was bred for children/small adults to ride?

• Yes. Also, they have a ton of youth-focused and youth-only shows, activities, etc., which a lot of registries (especially relatively smaller registries like this one) don't. I wasn't sure how deep I should go into the registries activities, or where I was crossing the line between describing the registry and promoting their activities. Dana boomer (talk) 14:45, 15 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• That's fine as it is.

• What is an "under saddle age limit", and does it apply to pony, human, or both?

• Human. I've reworded this a bit. Dana boomer (talk) 14:45, 15 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• It all makes sense now!

• Is there perhaps an image of the pony in one of those events, or maybe a historical image? It's not a huge deal if there isn't.

• The best image I have been able to find of the breed is the one in the infobox, and I'm not really even happy with that one. I haven't been able to find anything historical or in competition. I did add in an image of a pure-blood Appaloosa, as a founder of the breed, just so people can see what the "original" looks like. Does this work? Dana boomer (talk) 14:45, 15 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• Yeah, I like seeing the difference between the original Appaloosa and the POA. It's nice!

• The references look good.

Lovely job on a short but sweet article. I've got an eye on this page and promotion shouldn't be too far along! :) Keilana|^{Parlez ici} 02:57, 15 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the review. I believe I've addressed everything above, but had a few questions, so please let me know if there is additional work you would like to see done. I actually really appreciate having a non-horse person look at the articles I write, since they tend to see jargon and completeness issues that I completely miss due to my familiarity with the subject. Dana boomer (talk) 14:45, 15 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Yep, I had one or two comments in return. I totally understand about the non-specialized reader thing, I love having non-astronomy people read my articles because they read it completely differently. Great job! Keilana|^{Parlez ici} 17:39, 15 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, thanks Keilana, this one is all Dana's baby, but hope I could answer some questions. (It's not really relevant here, but I once got a temporary national card to judge a regional POA show because they needed three judges and there weren't three regular POA qualified judges in Montana, normally I do other stuff, but it was a delightful experience, great owners and exhibitors!) Montanabw^(talk) 19:29, 15 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the answer, is there any way one of you could gloss that in the article? I think it may be confused to readers who aren't as educated about horses. Montana - I remember you from a mediation years and years ago, it's good to see you still doing great work. :) Keilana|^{Parlez ici} 19:45, 15 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I made a tweak to the bit about the Paints, hope that helped! Saw a couple other really minor things to tweak. Montanabw^(talk) 20:47, 15 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, Montana! Keilana, is there anything else you'd like to see done on the article? Dana boomer (talk) 00:12, 18 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Nope, I'm totally happy with this. I'll do all the promotion bits now. Congratulations, and nice work! I definitely learned something from this. Keilana|^{Parlez ici} 03:42, 18 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you very much! Dana boomer (talk) 10:54, 18 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Looking for what I suspect is a point of clarification. Is the statement "Today, the Pony of the Americas Club is the most active, youth-oriented club in the US." accurate? If I were to be asked about youth-oriented clubs, I would have thought Boy Scouts of America and similar would rank higher. The POA website does not have figures to back up this statement so turn to the author of the article for references. Even if changed to read "Today, the Pony of the Americas Club is the most active, youth-oriented pony club in the US.", it would still be nice to identify the references. JGTank (talk) 03:23, 28 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Fair point. I tweaked the lede to be more in line with the sourced material later in the article. Montanabw^(talk) 05:11, 28 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]