Wikipedia:Peer review/Pony/archive1

Pony

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

This peer review discussion has been closed.
I've listed this article for peer review because there is some energy at WikiProject Equine (WPEQ) to begin upgrading this article to at least GA status. We are all fairly experienced editors and aware that we need more sources/footnotes, but beyond that we'd value some outside eyes, though remember that we already have horse which is already a GA, and our intent is NOT to repeat everything there over here; we want to focus on ponies rather than horses in general. This is an article that should be a high priority for us, has been "stable" (pardon the pun) for a long time as is, plus is an article that gets a lot of general interest, particularly from younger readers. So we would be delighted to have suggestions on WHERE we should focus our improvement efforts. For example, it would make no sense for us to spend time sourcing a section that we ought to just throw out, and we also would value ideas on whether we ought to add/expand something that's not even here. So, in short, if you wanted to promote this article to GA, what would YOU like to see improved?

Thanks in advance, Montanabw^(talk) 20:06, 1 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I did a few little fixes on things which just sprang out at me! I'd personally like a bit more in-depth stuff on uses of the pony - for example for adult riders (where appropriate), with pics of ponies with adult riders - maybe some contrasting pics of tiny tot on tiny pony with adult rider on bigger pony? And maybe a bit more on pony-driving (scurry driving with dinky ponies springs to mind). Pesky (talk) 11:47, 7 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

If you can find a source, go for it! The problem with these general info articles is, as Pitke so aptly put it, sourcing the "air is breathable" stuff. As for adults and photos, I believe that, though of horse phenotype and (mostly) horse bloodlines, both Stroller and Theodore O'Connor (who was 1/8 Shetland, I think) were technically classed as ponies. Montanabw^(talk) 19:06, 7 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Perfect source for adults successfully riding ponies would be the NFPEC Quadrille Team winning the Riding Clubs quadrille finals at Olympia. All-pony team, all adult riders. Pesky (talk) 07:52, 17 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Ruhrfisch comments: I agree this needs more sources. I am not an expert on horses, so I may have missed lots of things, but here are some suggestions for improvement.

EL checker in the toolbox on this page finds two dead links that will need to be fixed.
I wonder if some books geared to younger readers might contain some of the "sky is blue" material as refs.
There are two places where the text is sandwiched between two images (Polo pony is a full sandwich, the one in Uses is only partial). WP:MOSIMAGE says not to do this.
I think the lead image should be one that shows a pony in comparison to either humans or full-size horses. Perhaps one like File:289-o-Galant-SWE-71-SH-03.jpg of a Shetland pony and a human?
I am not sure the first sentence meets WP:LEAD - would it make sense to say in the first sentence something along the lines of "although there is no fixed definition as to what exactly defines a pony"
There are some things in the lead that are only in the lead, but should be in the article and expanded on there. For example, the pit ponies and etymology are only in the lead.
Watch WP:OVERLINKing - withers is linked twice in just the lead. At the same time some special horse / pony terms like barrel should be linked (if there is an article on it here).
According to WP:HEAD, section headers should avoid repeating the name of the article if at all possible. So a section like "Horses and ponies" might be better as "Definition". I am not as sure how to rename "Breeds and types that are not ponies"
I also wonder about the order of sections. I think it would be better to have the Characteristics section before Uses. Perhaps Definition, Characteristics, History, Uses, and then "Other small horses" (i.e. not ponies)
History has no dates / years - I think some specifics would help here. I would talk about landrace and give some specific examples (Shetland ponies), plus the pit ponies should be here.
Make sure things belong in the sections they are in - for example Pony Clubs are in Uses - is this really a use? Then the US Pony CLub is in "Breeds and types that are not ponies" - could these two mentions be combined?
I was surprised there was not anything on Ponies in popular culture - My Little Pony, Seinfled's "I had a pony", whatever.
This is pure OR on my part, but it seems to me that ponies in modern culture (at least in the US) are related to girls much more than boys, and to some extent to affluence (rich children have or had ponies). There is also the use of pony as an adjective - so a pony keg is a small beer keg, and the pony tail might be mentioned
Most See also links are of articles that are not linked in the article already - see WP:See also
Please make sure that the existing text includes no copyright violations, plagiarism, or close paraphrasing. For more information on this please see Wikipedia:Wikipedia_Signpost/2009-04-13/Dispatches. (This is a general warning given in all peer reviews, in view of previous problems that have risen over copyvios.)

Hope this helps. If my comments are useful, please consider peer reviewing an article, especially one at Wikipedia:Peer review/backlog (which is how I found this article). I do not watch peer reviews, so if you have questions or comments, please contact me on my talk page. Yours, Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 03:30, 17 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Great comments, thanks, Ruhrfisch! It will take us some time to get through all this, but I think you have been real helpful to point us in some good directions. Montanabw^(talk) 17:26, 18 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]