not interested can skip right over it to the next section Points of high interest belong in the lead of the article and in the lead paragraph of each section The structure of the article on the other hand should accommodate readers who read the article from start to finish so it should follow some kind of internal logic Re Ealdgyth s I m fine above diff my opinion the article is loaded with details imported from other articles Don t force the reader to wade through those details let the reader follow a link if they are interested Um it s more like other articles were spun off from this one with remnants and main links left behind That s the history of the article I ve been following it for however long I ve been on wikipedia At least a dozen new articles were spun off from this one in that time and even more before that I m sure Again I do not favor cutting out much of the information in the article as generally this is all information that people who want to know about horses will want to know I can not tell you the number of times I get asked about the age horses live to and this includes at FAC or other information about their care and feeding This is not a warbler species article it is an article about a species who is intertwined with human culture Dittos Compare other companion animal articles such as cat and dog Both have extensive sections related to human interaction though each is arranged very differently Putting all these tangential details in this article amounts to cruft and it is very tedious to read But hey if you must insist on keeping all that stuff I will start adding all my many favorite factoids about horses No seriously I dislike reading in this talk page some contributors are told sorry their pet factoid can t go in the article because it is full of other contributors factoids It sounds like Ealdgyth and Montanabw are trying to write Frequently asked questions about horses except that article does not belong in an encyclopedia does it You know what This article is the first place a lot of folks WILL end up with questions about horses since it s going to show up high in Google searches I thought the idea of the articles was that we were writing for the readers to give them information that they were looking for As I ve said during the present GA review I d like to see a few changes to the structure but so far as the charge of cruft is concerned I think the article has it just about right There s a fine line particularly with domesticated animals it seems between providing relevant and interesting information and writing a how to manual Compare this Horse article with Ferret for instance which I ve struggled with for what seems like my entire time on wikipedia and it s hardly any better now than it was two years ago Preceding unsigned comment added by Music The following was submitted by Some ignorant person tagged it as vandalism I am sure there have been studies Anyone feel like creating a section on this topic special contributions RHaworth c