Talk:Australian weasel shark
Australian weasel shark has been listed as one of the Natural sciences good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it. Review: December 9, 2013. (Reviewed version). |
This article is rated GA-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Copyright problem removed
[edit]This article was based on the corresponding article at fishbase.org or niwascience.co.naz, neither of which are compatibly licensed for Wikipedia. It has been revised on this date as part of a large-scale project to remove infringement from these sources. Earlier text must not be restored, unless it can be verified to be free of infringement. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material; such additions will be deleted. Contributors may use external websites as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences or phrases. Accordingly, the material may be rewritten, but only if it does not infringe on the copyright of the original or plagiarize from that source. Please see our guideline on non-free text for how to properly implement limited quotations of copyrighted text. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously, and persistent violators will be blocked from editing. While we appreciate contributions, we must require all contributors to understand and comply with these policies. (For background on this situation, please see the related administrator's noticeboard discussion and the cleanup task force subpage.) Thank you. --– Sadalmelik ☎ 07:17, 25 March 2009 (UTC)
GA Review
[edit]GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
- This review is transcluded from Talk:Australian weasel shark/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.
Reviewer: J Milburn (talk · contribs) 18:41, 8 December 2013 (UTC)
Looks pretty strong, as ever.
- "John Stevens and Glen Cuthbert in 1983.[2] Its scientific description was authored by William White, Peter Last, and Leonard Compagno" Do we have articles about any of these people? We certainly do for Zootaxa.
- Added some links.
- "The large, oval eyes possess nictitating membranes and have a notched posterior rim" Plural eyes, but singular rims?
- Fixed.
- "octopuses such as Callistoctopus" Callistoctopus species?
- Added "spp."
- "such as that sharks over 90 cm (35 in) long eat almost nothing else" Do you need "as"?
- Removed the "as".
- "(see above)" WP:SELF?
- Changed to "...habitat shift toward coral reefs".
- "particularly for smaller sharks; other cephalopods, mud lobsters, crabs, and echinoderms are rarely consumed." This reads oddly; how about adding "in addition," before "other cephalopods"?
- Divided into two sentences.
- I'm assuming we don't know how long they live? Are those that are caught used for anything?
- There's no longevity data. I looked for references about them being utilized but there wasn't any, so they may be discarded.
- Links added.
- A distribution category would be good.
- Added one.
Very good, as ever. J Milburn (talk) 18:41, 8 December 2013 (UTC)
- Let me know of further issues. -- Yzx (talk) 21:28, 8 December 2013 (UTC)
- Very happy with the responses; promoting now. Great work! J Milburn (talk) 16:53, 9 December 2013 (UTC)
- Thanks for the review. -- Yzx (talk) 01:18, 10 December 2013 (UTC)
- Very happy with the responses; promoting now. Great work! J Milburn (talk) 16:53, 9 December 2013 (UTC)
- Wikipedia good articles
- Natural sciences good articles
- GA-Class shark articles
- Low-importance shark articles
- WikiProject Sharks articles
- GA-Class Fishes articles
- Low-importance Fishes articles
- WikiProject Fishes articles
- GA-Class Australia articles
- Low-importance Australia articles
- GA-Class Australian biota articles
- Low-importance Australian biota articles
- WikiProject Australian biota articles
- WikiProject Australia articles