Wikipedia:Featured article review/Australian Cattle Dog/archive1

The following is an archived discussion of a featured article review. Please do not modify it. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page or at Wikipedia talk:Featured article review. No further edits should be made to this page.

The article was delisted by Nikkimaria via FACBot (talk) 5:41, 20 July 2024 (UTC) [1].

Australian Cattle Dog

Notified: Dippiljemmy, WikiProject Dogs, [diff for talk page notification]

Review section

I am nominating this featured article for review because of self-published content being used as well as some WP:NOTGUIDEBOOK style content on grooming and training that isn't breed specific, more detail about the latter on the talk page. Traumnovelle (talk) 01:42, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with User:Traumnovelle that this article is suitable for a featured article and I thank Traumnovelle for nominating it. It is a well-rounded article on a popular topic. Thanks. (Dippiljemmy (talk) 08:06, 23 April 2024 (UTC))[reply]

The article is already featured, I'm nominating it due to the self-published and citation needed tag. I think the article just has a few issues that need sorting to retain the status. I notified you due to you having the most contributions whilst still being active on Wikipedia. Unfortunately the editor who did the work to get this article up to featured quality has quit. Traumnovelle (talk) 08:13, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Oh right, yeah I can have a look and fix up those tags over the next week I think for you. (Dippiljemmy (talk) 08:20, 23 April 2024 (UTC))[reply]

I think I've sorted out the issues that have been tagged. Hopefully this helps! (Dippiljemmy (talk) 06:00, 26 April 2024 (UTC))[reply]

Tail docking claim is still unsourced (I've tagged it).
The claim about all Australian states and territories banning it since 2004 is not supported by the source: I've changed it to remove the 'has been illegal since 2004' in favour of 'is illegal'.
'While an Australian Cattle Dog generally works silently, it will bark in alarm or to attract attention.' is still unsourced as the study is about the later general claim about barking and not dogs specifically.
The deafness claim was still made to a self-published source: I've rectified it by citing the original study
The non-breed specific and guidebook content is still in: If no one objects I will remove this

So overall just the claim about tail docking in the US and how the dogs use their bark whilst working need citing and the guidebook/non-breed specific content should be removed.

But thanks for your help so far, I do think this article can retain featured status with just the above three issues resolved. Traumnovelle (talk) 06:19, 26 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I've trimmed the grooming and training paragraphs, only issue that would disqualify this from being a featured article are the two citation needed tags. Traumnovelle (talk) 09:14, 30 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Traumnovelle: There are some other sections that need citations; I have indicated these with citation needed tags. Z1720 (talk) 16:39, 19 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I was only able to add a citation for one, I don't have access to any library sources (both offline and online) currently, although I doubt I'd be able to cite everyone even if I were back home. Traumnovelle (talk) 17:23, 19 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Popping in briefly -- the best I've been able to find for tail docking is the UKC standard, which states "The tail is customarily not docked, however, a docked tail should not be penalized.", the American Stock Dog Registry, which says that tail docking is "optional", and the book The Perfect Puppy which states that tail docking is "often" practiced in the US. This is searching online sources only, I'm at work and don't have easy access to my books. Doesn't quite support the statement as written, but perhaps something like "In the United States, the tail may be docked, while it is illegal, except in special circumstances, in Australia ...", though this leaves the open question of the tail status elsewhere. Rusalkii (talk) 20:34, 30 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Could we get an update on status here? Nikkimaria (talk) 18:24, 29 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Move to FARC no significant edits since April, uncited sections exist, which is a huge concern with an FA. Z1720 (talk) 01:37, 6 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

FARC section

Issues raised in the review section include sourcing and coverage. Nikkimaria (talk) 03:30, 6 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delist I can't see this getting an interested editor willing to put in the effort any time soon. Traumnovelle (talk) 02:56, 20 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delist: No significant edits since June, unsourced statements remain. Z1720 (talk) 19:12, 19 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delist - multiple CN tags, and several sources are unlikely to meet the FAC high-quality reliable sources bar, such as Lassic Kennels "Working/Herding Dogs" and petmd. Hog Farm _Talk 01:26, 20 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Closing note: This removal candidate has been delisted, but there may be a delay in bot processing of the close. Please leave the {{featured article review}} template in place on the talk page until the bot goes through. Nikkimaria (talk) 15:41, 20 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.