Talk:Dog/GA5

GA Review

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch

Nominator: Wolverine XI (talk · contribs) 16:39, 15 June 2024 (UTC)

Reviewer: Rjjiii (talk · contribs) 21:16, 4 October 2024 (UTC)

Good Article review progress box

Criteria: 1a. prose () 1b. MoS () 2a. ref layout () 2b. cites WP:RS () 2c. no WP:OR () 2d. no WP:CV () 3a. broadness () 3b. focus () 4. neutral () 5. stable () 6a. free or tagged images () 6b. pics relevant () Note: this represents where the article stands relative to the Good Article criteria. Criteria marked are unassessed

Starting up the review. Thanks for the patience, Wolverine XI. There are several existing reviews and talk page comments that I'll go through. Traumnovelle, I've watchlisted the talk page and subscribed to the thread at Talk:Dog#Health_conditions; you can also ping me about any issues you find. The organization looks good and is similar to Featured Articles (like Elephant). I'll go through section by section along with checking the older reviews:

• Two sources are cited in the Bibliography but don't have any inline citations pointing to them: Coppinger & Schneider (1995); Miklósi (2007).
• The Taxonomy section is lacking in topic sentences. It takes a linear kind of story-telling approach. The first line is about Linnaeus but should probably be about dogs and their taxonomy.
• There are many details about studies, but it's not clear whether dogs, wolves, and dingoes are [a] all one species, [b] separate somehow, or [c] disputed somehow.
• Evolution is an empty section. If sources on dogs talk either about the evolution of the wolf, dogs' early divergence from wolves, or the feralization of domestic dogs back to wild dogs, any of that could go here. If nothing should go here, then the section heading should go.
• "Domestication" is also very chronological and it makes it somewhat unclear.
• Consider glossing "commensal"
• The meaning of "taxed" is unclear.
• "In 2021, ..." this is towards the end of "Domestication" and the wording plus placement make it sound like this is just one study, but is this study not offering the academic consensus?
• It's not clear from this article how domesticated dogs differ from wolves. Consider borrowing some sources from Domestication syndrome. Much of the research into that idea deals with domesticated dogs and other canines (wolves, dingoes, coyotes, etc.).
• "Their behavioural traits include guarding, herding, hunting,[17] retrieving, and scent detection. Their personality traits include hypersocial behavior, boldness, and aggression." traits that they were bred for? I feel like a sentence is missing right before this.
• "All healthy dogs, regardless of their size and type, have an identical skeletal structure" One comment from the next section and I'll pause. It's not clear what this means. It just afterwards mentions the tail differences. The last paragraph is all about diverge in skull shape. The previous section ended talking about how variable breeds are. Look at these dudes.

I'm pausing there. I'll pick up later.Rjjⁱⁱⁱ (talk) 21:16, 4 October 2024 (UTC)