Talk:Skeleton panda sea squirt/GA1
Appearance
GA Review
GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch
Nominator: Chaotic Enby (talk · contribs) 23:41, 28 March 2024 (UTC)
Reviewer: Vortex3427 (talk · contribs) 14:00, 31 March 2024 (UTC)
Weird name. Weirder appearance. Initial comments (will take a closer look tomorrow):
- Article is in good shape.
- For referencing scientific details, I'd prefer if those news sites are mostly exorcised.
- I wonder if there is precedent on recently described species becoming GAs, besides your (ahem) hotly contested last effort.
- The news sites mostly mirror the scientific papers so it shouldn't be too hard to reference them to the sources directly (with the exception of FNN who directly interviewed the lead researcher on their own). Chaotıċ Enby (talk · contribs) 14:43, 31 March 2024 (UTC)
- Yes, please. They only need to replace the scientific details. — VORTEX3427 (Talk!) 14:44, 31 March 2024 (UTC)
- Fixed it, the scientific details are only sourced from the original paper, the press release and (in only one case) the researcher's interview now. Chaotıċ Enby (talk · contribs) 14:58, 31 March 2024 (UTC)
- Lede
- To be consistent with other sea squirt articles, the lede should be
ascidian (sea squirt)
instead. Also, should the alternative name skeleton panda ascidian (Hasegawa & Kajihawa 2024, p. 53) be mentioned, either in the lede or Etymology? anchored to the substrate
Just say surface- You could split into two sentences at
currents, in colonies
"currents. It lives in colonies". Also with the last sentence: "The researches formally described it three years later."
- To be consistent with other sea squirt articles, the lede should be
- History
formally undescribed
replace "not formally described"? I can't put my finger on why I find this weird. Also, link to undescribed taxon.Thanks to crowdfunding efforts
is colloquial. Maybe "Supported through crowdfunding" instead?the tunicate
Replace with a simple pronoun, as most readers don't know what a tunicate is.- Add "which is" before
only accessible
Four specimens were collected
You don't have to specify this, because there is always only one holotype (link holotype and paratype in the next mention). Also, does one colony count as one specimen?the holotype and three paratypes,in colonies ranging from one to four individuals.- Add a sentence in Etymology about the origins and meaning of the colloquial name "gaikotsu-panda-hoya" from Japanese netizens (The News 2024, Hasegawa & Kajihawa 2024, p. 53). The two sentences in Etymology don't have to be separate paragraphs
- Description
- I'm gonna need a bit more time with this section.
- Taxonomy
- Link
morphological
andspiracles
. Clavelina ossipandae was
The first can just be replaced with identified, sister species can be linked, and doesn't the last bit belong in the article for the genus instead of this one?more precisely recoveredidentified as the sister species of C. australisinside the genus Clavelina (found by the authors to be paraphyletic to Nephtheis)
- Link
- Distribution and ecology
known from Kume Island
By "known from", do you mean "discovered in" or "living in"?- Link
phytoplankton
.
- General
- You should keep the names you're using consistent. Are you using
Clavelina ossipandae
,C. ossipandae
, orSkeleton panda sea squirt
? - There are still also citations not to the peer-reviewed paper for scientific details e.g. FFN, press release. Even if they're interviews of the author, what makes the paper reliable is that it was published in a peer-reviewed scientific journal.
- You should keep the names you're using consistent. Are you using
- WritingAboutCreepypastas (talk) 08:36, 12 April 2024 (UTC)
- Lede
- Fixed it, the scientific details are only sourced from the original paper, the press release and (in only one case) the researcher's interview now. Chaotıċ Enby (talk · contribs) 14:58, 31 March 2024 (UTC)