Talk:Aging in dogs

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Aging in dogs article.
Article policies
Aging in dogs was a good article nominee, but did not meet the good article criteria at the time. There are suggestions below for improving the article. Once these are addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake.

Reviewed version: September 24, 2007
This article is supported by WikiProject Veterinary medicine.

This project provides a central approach to Veterinary medicine-related subjects on Wikipedia.
Please participate by editing the article, and help us assess and improve articles to good and 1.0 standards, or visit the wikiproject page for more details.
B This article has been rated as B-Class on the Project's quality scale.
(If you rated the article please give a short summary at comments to explain the ratings and/or to identify the strengths and weaknesses.)
A summary of this article appears in Dog.

[edit] merge

merge with Dog years ?

Agreed and merged. Actually Dog years changed to a redirect since all material is already in this article. No objections noted. FT2 (Talk | email) 10:42, 12 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] GA review

Here are my suggestions for improving this article to meet the GA criteria:

  • "The aging profile of dogs varies according to their adult size (often determined by their breed): - smaller dogs often live over 15 - 16 years, medium and large size dogs typically 10 to 13 years, and some giant dog breeds such as mastiffs, often only 7 to 8 years." - What's with the : - smaller dog...? The punctuation needs fixing.
  • "since the first year or two years representing some 18-25 years" - should specify that first two years of a dog represent 18-25 years of a human.
  • I personally don't think that it's a good idea to link words in the main body to an external link. Probably should put the calculator under "External links"
  • Once again, under "One size fits all", should specify which year is human and which year is for the dog.
  • And once again, probably shouldn't put an external link in the middle of the article for "Size/breed specific calculators"
  • "Emotional maturity occurs, as with humans, over an extended period of time and in stages......and full maturity around 3-4 years, although as with humans learning and refinement continues thereafter." - cite this statement!
  • With the entire Aging Profile section, it seems that there is too many comparisons between dog age and human age. I recommend using more terms like "Emotional maturity", "adulthood", "full maturity", "socio-sexual interest" as you have done in that paragraph, to describe the phases of aging in dogs.
  • These are the sentences that can be reworded in Aging Profile:
    • "popular myth suggests that "one dog year equals seven human years" or the like" - remove "or the like"
    • "which suggests that the first two years equal 10.5 years each, with subsequent years equalling four human years" - which suggests that the first two dog years each equaling to 10.5 human years, with subsequent dog years equalling four human years.
    • "This is more accurate but still fails to allow for size/breed, which is a significant factor" - This is more accurate but still fails to take size and breed into consideration, which is a significant factor.
    • "a one-year-old dog or cat has generally reached its full growth and is sexually mature" - is the mentioning of cat necessary?
    • "In all but large breeds" - In all breeds excluding large ones
    • "small-breed dogs (such as small terriers) then become geriatric at about 11 years" - take out the word "then"
  • "A random-bred dog (also known as a mongrel) has an average life expectancy of 13.2 years in the USA and much of Europe." - cite!
  • Under Sorted by breed, the first sentence should be rephrased. I suggest something like: "An experiment conducted by Michell in 1999 showed these following data." And once again, probably best to not have a external link (Dog Longevity Website) in the main body itself. Use an inline citation, and the link can be accessed under "References".
  • On my monitor, the table appears squashed and cramped. The last digit in the left Exp. column are cut off. Probably divide it into 2 columns instead of 3.
  • Under Factors affecting left expectancy, expand and elaborate more on Diet, it even has a tag there.
  • put [Ref 6] in the very end of the paragraph instead of inside the brackets.
  • "and may develop dietary or skin problems or go deaf." - go deaf? become deaf is more encyclopedic.
  • Try not to leave a gap between the sentence and the citation. Stick them right next to each other.
  • Should not wikilink things that don not have an article.
  • Errm. Illnesses and Behavior, needs and adaptability sections obviously need expanding.
  • Put [ref 9] alongside [ref 8].
  • In Handling aging in dogs, probably not a good idea to start a section with a large quote. Put that quote underneath the list.
  • Once again, don't wikilink things that don't have an article.
  • The list in Handling aging in dogs doesn't sound like an encyclopedia. It sounds like a "how to care for your old dog" guide. Try changing the tone of language to sound more encyclopedic.
  • References 4, 7, 8 and 9 need to be fixed. When citing a website, you need to include these:
    • the author that wrote the information
    • the publisher that published the info
    • a title for the link
    • the date that it is written
    • the date you retrieved the source.

When you have those information, code them in according to WP:CIT.

Because there are so many things that need to be improved. I have failed this article. You can nominate it again when the suggested improvements are made. Oidia (talk) 07:06, 24 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] The graph's labels

The graph's labeling scheme seems a bit wonky to me. If anything the X and Y axes should be switched, because a "dog year" is traditionally understood to be the term for the imaginary unit used to describe a dog's physiological age, whereas a "human year" is an actual year. Perhaps "Real time" and "Dog's equivalent age" would be better. Octan (talk) 20:41, 4 April 2008 (UTC)