Talk:Thoroughbred

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Thoroughbred article.
Article policies
Archives: 1
Featured article star Thoroughbred is a featured article; it (or a previous version of it) has been identified as one of the best articles produced by the Wikipedia community. Even so, if you can update or improve it, please do.
WikiProject Equine 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.
Featured article FA This page has been rated as FA-Class on the quality assessment scale
High This article has been rated as high-importance on the importance assessment scale
Horse breeds task force
 This article is within the scope of the Horse breeds task force.
This article is part of WikiProject Thoroughbred Racing, an attempt to improve Wikipedia articles and content on topics related to the sport of thoroughbred horse racing. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.


Archived talk:

Contents

[edit] Out of town

I will be gone until Sunday evening, and unable to access the internet during that time. I have been a minor contributor to this page, and trust the judgement of the major editors Ealdgyth, Dana boomer and Montanabw. The edited version of the Health section is viewable at User:Getwood/Sandbox/Thoroughbred. At the top of the page, edits are viewable. At the bottom of the page is a clean version without strikeouts, etc. I will be happy with whatever the group comes up with (as long as the fragile bones thing stays gone... See Wolff's law for explanation of bone modeling in response to load). Thanks, and a great weekend to all. Getwood (talk) 15:08, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

Anyone want to add the rewrite in the sandbox to the article, or have a problem if I do so? Montanabw(talk) 19:01, 25 April 2008 (UTC)
I've dropped the section into the article. Dana boomer (talk) 12:54, 28 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Next step

Okay, the next step is probably a peer review. If no one objects, I'll go ahead and list it in the morning, it usually runs for two weeks or so. I'm going to be out of town until the 11th or so. I'll have internet intermittantly, just no library of books, so that'll limit some of my usefulness. Ealdgyth - Talk 02:50, 30 April 2008 (UTC)

First peer review is in, and I've done some of the tweaks suggested. The dash thing is easiest to do with a request to a person who has a script that will fix them. I'll do that when we are ready to go to FAC. There are still a few issues at the PR, you can find them by following the link above in the peer review request box where it says "request". Ealdgyth - Talk 14:16, 5 May 2008 (UTC)
Works for me, go for it. My only question is if we want to wait a few more days for the Eight Belles thing to quiet down. I've been reverting stuff on her placed in really odd spots (like the Western riding article. WTF??)
FYI, per a previous edit, I made yet another tweak to the "please don't call other breeds 'Thoroughbreds'" section, putting the better-phrased sentence sooner in the paragraph. There were sentences in two different places saying basically the same thing, so tossed one. But why oh why do people so get their unders in a bunch when you tell them something IS actually incorrect usage? Yeah, I know, it's my weak spot, but some days I feel like I am the only person left on planet earth who cares about the degradation of language related to horses (I am still cringing even time some newspaper says Eight Belles broke her "ankles" PASTERNS! PASTERNS YOU MORONS!!!) Sorry ... (choking incoherently) Just please, give me 24 hours without my running across yet another idiot who says "reign in." (xpmpth, gxrposdiurlp) (wiping spittle from computer screen...) Montanabw(talk) 05:42, 7 May 2008 (UTC)
I've dropped in a new photo, which involves a less-quickly-moving (not very grammatical, but you get the point) horse that is moving into the article, as suggested. If there are any problems with this photo, or if anyone else has a better one, please feel free to revert or change... I've also rewritten the last paragraph of the intro so as to better reflect the rewritten health issues section. Dana boomer (talk) 18:27, 8 May 2008 (UTC)
Works for me, though I did like the running horse better. This new one is OK too, though. Too bad there are no public domain images of Secretariat (horse)! LOL! Montanabw(talk) 23:40, 8 May 2008 (UTC)
Well, technically, because Secy boy is dead, we could use a fair use image of him but it probably wouldn't fly at FAC because the article isn't about him. I think this one is probably okay. So. We did Peer Review, and it was helpful. Are we ready to think about FAC soon? I've just got done with looking at a huge pile of articles, some of which deal with TBs, so I think I'd like a week to digest them and maybe work them into the article. Some of them are vet type things dealing with race horse breakdowns, etc. One is titled "Advertising and pricing policies in the equine breeding industry or sex and the single stallion" which I'm not sure will have anything terribly interesting to add in, but I'm dying to get a ref into as many articles as possible just because the title is too cool. Back to FAC, I plan to do a joint nom, Dana, Montana, myself, and who else do we need to add in? Ealdgyth - Talk 00:28, 24 May 2008 (UTC)
Ask Cgoodwin definitely. That was who got us going on all the bloodline stuff. And maybe old editors like Cuddy Witter or Culnacreann, though they haven't been real active? Just ideas Montanabw(talk) 04:59, 24 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] FAC

It's up at FAC now. It usually takes a bit of time before the feeding frenzy starts. Ealdgyth - Talk 12:41, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] TB price stats

Did some fast research on TB prices, here are links and my summary. Not sure where or if this needs to go into the article, but for what it's worth:

Hope this is a start. I kind of wonder if the price thing has a good place to be worked in and if it would be a PITA to maintain, as data could get dated so fast? Montanabw(talk) 21:54, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

I think just a flavour is needed, and a link to this useful site. It could go in Uses, or the racing sub-section, or on its own. Basically: Some Ts are very pricey, as much as XX at yearling stage (or whatever) bla bla, but most are not bla bla. Top stud fees can exceed XXX. Something like that. Johnbod (talk) 22:42, 4 June 2008 (UTC)
Sounds like a good suggestion, thanks Johnbod. I'll let the prose smiths do their work, they write better than I do. Montana? Dana? Getwood? Ealdgyth - Talk 23:45, 4 June 2008 (UTC)
"bla bla"? ;-) You mean you want me to actually do some WORK? LOL! More to the point, where in the article should we put this bit, as it probably will be just one sentence? Wisdom of the collective mind? Montanabw(talk) 08:19, 5 June 2008 (UTC)
I'd think usage, myself. Ealdgyth - Talk 11:56, 5 June 2008 (UTC)
I threw some data and sourcing up in the Usage section. We need to get sales averages for the UK if possible? Still looking for data on stud fees. Ealdgyth - Talk 17:07, 5 June 2008 (UTC)
More is up, including some UK stuff. Stud fees are still lacking. Next up, mine out Blood-horse Ealdgyth - Talk 20:41, 5 June 2008 (UTC)
There, someone else can copyedit my (poor) prose. (grins) I think I covered most of the details, it's pretty dry reading! Ealdgyth - Talk 20:55, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Congrats!

I just came over to say support after all that and you'd already got your gong. Well done. Fainites barley 19:39, 8 June 2008 (UTC)