Japanese Spitz was one of the good articles, but it has been removed from the list. There are suggestions below for improving the article to meet the good article criteria. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Dogs, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles related to Canidae and commonly referred to as "dogs" and of which the domestic dog is but one of its many members, on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.DogsWikipedia:WikiProject DogsTemplate:WikiProject DogsDogs articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Japan, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Japan-related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project, participate in relevant discussions, and see lists of open tasks. Current time in Japan: 10:31, November 20, 2024 (JST, Reiwa 6) (Refresh)JapanWikipedia:WikiProject JapanTemplate:WikiProject JapanJapan-related articles
Result: Consensus is to delist due to article failing criteria 1(b) (prose quality), 3(a) (broad coverage), and 2(b) (referencing).SilkTork *Tea time11:28, 26 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The article does not follow the standard format for a dog breed article - being sections on History, Description, Temperament, Health (as a minimum). In appearance/size variations and in history, there are large uncited sections of text. I also do not think that the current history section is complete and needs to be fleshed out; and finally the references are using a variety of formatting with missing dates etc. Miyagawa(talk)19:03, 9 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Delist. In addition to what Miyagawa has commented on, there are questionable, unreferenced claims throughout the article including:
"coat has a non-stick texture often described as being similar to Teflon"
"and is a popular pet" (where?)
"they are brave and consider it their duty to protect their family" (something this subjective needs a citation to a high-quality source)
"They are a very clean dog and do not have a doggy odor, due to the texture of their coat mud and dirt fall off or can be brushed out very easily." (run-on sentence too(!))
Overly general statements are included -- all puppies have itchy gums, for example, not just Japanese Spitz -- and dubious web pages are cited:
Delist/Demote. The article is clearly falling short of Good Article Criteria Part 2b "provides in-line citations from reliable sources for direct quotations, statistics, published opinion, counter-intuitive or controversial statements that are challenged or likely to be challenged" As per Anna's comments above. I also don't believe it covers the topic deeply enough to be considered to be of good article status (eg: lack of references, lack of health information). There are some sections that are far too short, eg, care and "mortality". Keetanii (talk) 10:52, 13 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]