Talk:European pied flycatcher

Comments

Njoymusic2 and I added a section on the mating systems of this species. WhitleyTucker (talk) 01:07, 7 October 2012 (UTC) Njoymusic2 (talk) 07:18, 10 October 2012 (UTC)

Your mating systems section is extremely thorough! I really learned a lot from it. I made a few minor edits in word choice and a couple others to make the section more concise. Besides that, I really did not see any other major problems. Each of your subsections has enought information to warrant it going into its own section which is really good. This article definitely deserves to be rated as better than a start. You should nominate it to be reassessed for that. My only other suggestion would be to include a picture or two in your section to add some interest. Other than that, it really does look good! E.middlebrook (talk) 22:17, 16 October 2012 (UTC)

As noted by E.middlebrook, the mating systems section gives a thorough review of some of the literature here. Your section on how polygyny has evolved in the organism is especially comprehensive. Though very informative, it may help the clarity of the article to make some areas more brief. I was left wondering on the accuracy of hypotheses 2 & 3 since you mention hypothesis 1 has been rejected. I worked a little on citation placement (the spacing against the period) and grammar (passive voice, word choice, etc.). I added a couple headings to help split paragraphs where you wrote on the gender differences in mating behavior, however this change is not necessary and may not jive with the your WikiProject's guidelines. Overall, the mating systems section is really coming along and nicely approaches a broad range of topics. The comments mentioned by Jimfbleak can really make this piece shine. Nsavalia23 (talk) 00:58, 17 October 2012 (UTC)

Comments

Thanks for additions, I hope you will find these comments helpful

• Headings should use normal capitalisation and not mention the subject of the article, which they are assumed to be about. I've fixed these.
• The English speaking countries within the breeding and wintering ranges all use BE spelling, I've fixed "behaviour", didn't see any others.
• Binomials should be italicised in text and references, but better to usethe common name in body of article anyway.
• You shouldn't have all capital titles in refs, even if that's what the original had.
• You have very few wikilinks. If you link monogamy, you don't need to explain it. Plenty of other technical terms need links, and the absence of links makes it look as if text has just been cut and pasted.
• Refs should immediately follow punctuation, no space.
• Books need isbn and page numbers
• You keep repeating refs instead of using <ref name = name> and <ref name = name/> I've fixed one of the Atalalo refs so you can see how it works
• There shouldn't be any bare urls in refs, either use a cite template or [url title] for full text, use doi for abstracts

Jimfbleak - talk to me? 06:25, 10 October 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for the suggestions. I'll work on the refs and wikilinks over the next few days Njoymusic2 (talk) 02:19, 11 October 2012 (UTC)

Jimfbleak: You are also welcome to make any changes that you see fitNjoymusic2 (talk) 19:33, 11 October 2012 (UTC)

Just for info, I tidied a couple of refs, one of which wasn't in line anyway — it wasn't one of yours Jimfbleak - talk to me? 08:07, 12 October 2012 (UTC)

Peer Review

This is a great overall article. I fixed a couple of small grammatical errors in the article. I did notice that you will sometimes use the passive voice. I attempted to switch these to the active voice but I may have missed some. If you had done this for stylistic reasons, then I apologize for changing them. I also wonder whether it is necessary to name the authors of the study that you are talking about or whether it is sufficient to just cite it. This may be something to think about. Great article. --Jeremy.winkler (talk) 01:53, 17 October 2012 (UTC)

The article offers very comprehensive information about the mating system and parental care of the European pied flycatcher. There are some problems that I have noticed though specific to Wikipedia writing. It is good that you try to credit every cited source to specific researchers. However, I feel like Wikipedia prefers concision. All the author names and experiment methods can be omitted in the main text since the references usually offer every detail needed to locate the particular source. I took out long author names in some places and replaced with "a study showed that...". Also, it's nice that you clarify some important definitions in the mating system, such as monogamy and polygyny. However, since the two terms are already linked to their respective Wikipedia pages, it might not be necessary to elaborate too much on their meanings, so I took out this part too. For terms that are not available on Wiki though, it will be helpful if further explanation is provided, just as what you have done with "successive polygyny". In addition, I moved the citation from the end of a paragraph to the end of the first sentence that introduced the cited source. Some sentences might still to be cited though. For example, the first characteristic of male mating behavior under "Gender difference in mating behavior" lacks a citation. I corrected some minor grammatical errors as well. Overall, it's an informative piece! --Tianyi Cai (talk) 02:57, 17 October 2012 (UTC)

Comments re GA

• WP:LEAD doesn't summarise article
• You need sections on Taxonomy, Distribution and habitat, Status (see BirdLife page) and Feeding
• You need to lose the parochial British stuff

More to follow I'd also suggest that you follow the standard Bird project headings to help your structure Jimfbleak - talk to me? 11:37, 25 November 2012 (UTC)

FWIW, I'm currently working on Pale Crag Martin as a potential FA. You won't need the same amount of detail, but it might give some ideas Jimfbleak - talk to me? 11:39, 25 November 2012 (UTC)

Jimfbleak, thanks for the feedback. WhitleyTucker and I will continue to edit this page over the next week or two. We plan to add sections on taxonomy, distribution and habitat, pictures, and more. Njoymusic2 (talk) 19:33, 29 November 2012 (UTC)

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:European Pied Flycatcher/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: MeegsC (talk · contribs) 22:21, 13 December 2012 (UTC) I've never quite had one of these in the garden, but have seen many on various trips. I'll have a close look over the next few days, but here are some initial comments:

• The lead needs to be expanded. It should be a summary of the article. See WP:LEAD for more information.
• Use the bird's common name rather than its scientific name (in captions as well as the article). Other than in the taxonomy section, lose all references to Ficedula hypoleuca.
• Capitalize the bird's name consistently. Per WP:MOS, it's "European Pied Flycatcher".
• The article is missing several key sections: Taxonomy, Habitat and range, and Diet immediately spring to mind.
• All metric measurements should also show imperial units. Use the {{convert}} template.
• All number ranges should use en-dashes rather than hyphens.
• Many paragraphs have no citations. A minimum of one per paragraph is needed.
• The bird is widespread in Europe and Asia, yet the only section about its status talks only about Britain? Why?
• The referencing section needs work. See WP:CITE for help — or use the citation tool (Cite) at the top of the editing box.

I'll go into more detail section by section once you've had a chance to address these more general issues. I'm watch listing this page. Let me know if any of these comments need clarifying! MeegsC (talk) 22:21, 13 December 2012 (UTC)

Given that it's been more than 3 weeks and the above concerns have not been addressed, I'm guessing the nominator doesn't have time to complete this now. I'd rate it a solid B, but it needs work before it's ready to be rated GA. MeegsC (talk) 13:33, 5 January 2013 (UTC)

It was an assignment in a college course; as I just noted in Talk:Red-collared Widowbird/GA2, the class ended in December, and submitted about two dozen GANs in late November, including this one. BlueMoonset (talk) 14:26, 5 January 2013 (UTC)

I'm a student that was in the class last fall and I'm trying to get many of the articles to GA classification. I'm starting this one now and will try to address all of the issues in the review before resubmitting it for GA.Gabriel.hassler (talk) 02:18, 23 January 2013 (UTC)

I am a student currently enrolled in this class, and I added ISSN, DOI, and ISBN numbers to various references. ashleynlin (talk) September 26, 2013 —Preceding undated comment added 20:51, 26 September 2013 (UTC)

I am a student in a Behavioral Ecology course. I added some wikilinks and did some minor edits on the lead. aliciacanas (talk) September 26, 2013

Comments

Hey all, heads up: I, along with two colleagues have been working on this page. We made some edits in response to all the things that were found lacking earlier by people reviewing it for GA status.

I fixed a lot of the references. A few were repeated, and lacking names. Also, some were just naked URl citations.

I also added a few references to relevant sections, like a at the end of a paragraph about divorce behavior. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jabes808 (talk • contribs) 19:29, 27 September 2013 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on European pied flycatcher. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20161029043651/https://data.nbn.org.uk/Taxa/NHMSYS0000530362/Grid_Map to https://data.nbn.org.uk/Taxa/NHMSYS0000530362/Grid_Map

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 12:52, 9 November 2016 (UTC)

Wikipedia Ambassador Program course assignment

This article was the subject of an educational assignment at Washington University supported by the Wikipedia Ambassador Program during the 2012 Fall term. Further details are available on the course page.

The above message was substituted from {{WAP assignment}} by PrimeBOT (talk) on 16:06, 2 January 2023 (UTC)