Talk:Red-collared widowbird: Difference between revisions
TwinsMetsFan (talk | contribs) m correcting value of {{{term}}} per Template:WAP assignment/doc using AWB |
No edit summary |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
{{BirdTalk|class=Start|importance=low}} |
{{BirdTalk|class=Start|importance=low}} |
||
{{ |
{{GA nominee|19:37, 17 December 2012 (UTC)|nominator=[[User:Samara levine|Samara levine]] ([[User talk:Samara levine|talk]])|page=2|subtopic=Biology and medicine|status=|note=}} |
||
Revision as of 19:37, 17 December 2012
 | Red-collared widowbird is currently a Biology and medicine good article nominee. Nominated by Samara levine (talk) at 19:37, 17 December 2012 (UTC) An editor has indicated a willingness to review the article in accordance with the good article criteria. Further reviews are welcome from any editor who has not contributed significantly to this article (or nominated it), and can be added to the review page, but the decision whether or not to list the article as a good article should be left to the first reviewer.
|
Untitled
This article is well-written with a lot of information covering a range of topics, from mating systems to the specific morphology of the widowbird. The article was originally just one large chunk of text so I've broken it into generic sections, which led to the automatic creation of a table of contents. You can reorganize the paragraphs or put it into sub-sections in order to make the information clearer. Njoymusic2 (talk) 22:49, 25 November 2012 (UTC) Template:WAP assignment
The article is as a whole well written. There are a few parts that need further clarification. The sentence: "Also, looking at body size and condition, this accounts for 55% of the variation in tail length" is confusing. I would recommend taking the part about variation in tail length completely but I think that should be the decision of the original author. The other part of the article that is confusing is the discussion of asymmetry. I couldn't tell whether it meant asymmetry in tail length or red pattern or whether it was something different. Again, this may be a little too much detail for a Wikipedia article. Gabriel.hassler (talk) 05:31, 26 November 2012 (UTC)
Peer Review
For this article, I made some slight alterations to the writing style, editing for clarity proper grammar. I noted and changed several typos, and I changed some sentences for better flow and clarity. I also edited some content for correctness/clarity. I italicized scientific names and marked where citations might be helpful. I changed the “Sexual Dimorphism” section to “Morphology.”
I rather enjoyed the article. I would suggest expanding on the “Morphology” section. It would also be beneficial to state who conducts the studies mentioned, especially in the “Plumage” section. I would suggest clarifying the concept of asymmetry, as this portion of the article is slightly hard to follow. Finally, I would include more photos.
As an aside, I would love if there was some discussion of how the Red-collared Widowbird differs from the Long-Tailed Widowbird. The photo currently on the article seems very similar to the other species and some of the facts seem to match the Long-tailed Widowbird. This might be a reason to include the names of researchers. --Cobiorower (talk) 03:00, 27 November 2012 (UTC)cobiorower