Wikipedia:Peer review/Jersey Act/archive1

Jersey Act

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch • Watch peer review

A script has been used to generate a semi-automated review of the article for issues relating to grammar and house style; it can be found on the automated peer review page for March 2009.

This peer review discussion has been closed.
I've listed this article for peer review because…I'm thinking of taking it to FAC, but am not sure it's got enough context in it for non-horse people to understand. Prose and flow concerns also gratefully appreciated!

Thanks, Ealdgyth - Talk 12:26, 30 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Finetooth comments: This is most interesting, and I had no trouble understanding it.

Lead

"In 1913, the Jockey Club and the owners of the General Stud Book passed a regulation, named after the proposer of the Act, Lord Jersey, that prohibited the registration of horses in the General Stud Book unless all their ancestors had also been registered in that book." - Suggestion for better flow and to avoid repetition: " In 1913, the Jockey Club and the owners of the General Stud Book passed a regulation, named after its proposer, Lord Jersey, that prohibited the registration of horses in the book unless all of their ancestors had also been registered". I think it's clear from context that "registered" meant registered in the General Stud Book rather than registered elsewhere.
"Although American breeders protested the Act... " - I believe "act" should have a lower-case "a" except where it is part of the formal title. A few more of these are lurking in the article.
Book titles generally appear in italics. I changed a couple, then saw many more instances and went ahead and italicized them all.

Background

"The rules for registration allowed a horse to be registered if one of two conditions were met, the first being that all the horse's ancestors were registered in the General Stud Book. The second option was that the horse was bred outside of Britain or Ireland and was registered in the stud book of its country of origin." - Suggestion for tightening: "The rules allowed a horse to be registered if all of the horse's ancestors were registered in the General Stud Book or if it had been bred outside of Britain or Ireland and was registered in the stud book of its country of origin."

Repeal

Another reason was that it made little sense to exclude some of the most successful racehorses in Europe from registration, which just hurt the British and Irish breeders in the long run." - Maybe this could be shortened to "Another reason was that it made little sense to exclude some of the most successful racehorses in Europe from registration". The "second-rate" sentence in the "Effects" section makes clear the negative effect on British and Irish horse breeders.
You might consider merging the one-sentence orphan paragraph at the end with the paragraph above it.

Citations

I'm used to seeing commas separating the parts of the citations. An example would be "Willett, Classic Racehorse, pp. 71–74".

I've never had any concerns with this style at FAC Ealdgyth - Talk 14:35, 7 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Citation 5 needs a publication date.

Images

These look good to me, and the licenses seem fine.

I hope these few suggestions prove helpful. Finetooth (talk) 18:52, 4 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Fixed the above, thanks for the very helpful suggestions! Ealdgyth - Talk 14:35, 7 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]