Talk:Cuban macaw/GA1
Appearance
GA Review[edit]
GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch
Reviewer: J Milburn (talk · contribs) 20:56, 3 June 2014 (UTC)
I always enjoy reading your articles- review to follow. J Milburn (talk) 20:56, 3 June 2014 (UTC)
- The lead feels a little long for an article of this length. Perhaps you could trim some of the physical description, which feels a little detailed for a lead section?
- I think Native American is preferred, but perhaps "indigenous Cubans" may be preferable? I'm not sure.
- "19 skins of the Cuban macaw still exist in fifteen" Inconsistent numbering
- "Several specimens have also become lost." It's not clear what is meant. Do you mean something like "In addition to the 19 specimens known, several have been lost since the species's extinction."?
- "abraded cranium" Jargon
- "The first known fossil was identified by extrapolating from the size of Cuban macaw skins and bones of extant macaws.[6]" Perhaps this could be mentioned along with the description of the fossil rather than at the end of the paragraph? Or are you not referring to the subfossil?
- "As many as thirteen extinct macaws have at times been suggested to have lived on the Caribbean islands until recently, many of them hypothetical." Very difficult sentence. How about "As many as thirteen now-extinct species of macaw have variously been suggested to have lived on the Caribbean islands." I'm not sure I understand what "many of them hypothetical" means.
- "named by Rothschild in 1905" Can we have a full name and a link?
- "The reviewer's objection has not been followed since." What does that mean? (I've also restructured the preceding sentences. Please double-check them!)
- "naso-frontal hinge" jargon
- " which was a hollow in a palm" Presumably, the nest was built in a hollow in a palm, rather than being identical with a hollow in a palm?
- "One subfossil rostrum was found in a cave, though such are usually not visited by macaws, but the surrounding region was possibly a swamp." This needs rephrasing
- "but Bangs and Zappey reported" Full names?
- "typical of the Zapata Swamp" Do you mean "as in the Zapata Swamp" or something?
- Just as a general note- I've trimmed some of what seemed to be slightly judgmental language. We're (I suspect) on a similar page concerning the issue, so all the more reason for us to avoid saying things that could be considered non-neutral.
- "Parrots are often the first species to be exterminated from a given locality, especially islands." This seems like a pretty wild claim. Could it be backed up a little? Presumably, you mean the first bird species?
- "Caribbean Journal of Science. 3 44: 287–290." What's going on with that reference?
- Some books lack publication locations, some journals lack publishers. Consistency is good. (I'd recommend losing journal publishes- publication locations for books works either way.)
- "Greenway, J. C. (1967). Extinct and Vanishing Birds of the World. New York: American Committee for International Wild Life Protection 13" What's the "13"?
Seems like a solid article. I'm yet to check the images, but I can't imagine that they'll be replete with problems! J Milburn (talk) 21:52, 3 June 2014 (UTC)
- Thanks for the review, I have to hand in stuff for school on Friday, so a bit busy, but I'll answer soon. FunkMonk (talk) 08:31, 4 June 2014 (UTC)
- The article just received a copy edit I had requested some time ago. It removed some stuff I wanted to keep, but later today I'll re-add that, and fix your points above. FunkMonk (talk) 06:25, 6 June 2014 (UTC)
Ok, I'm going to go ahead and promote. The article's looking very good, but I'd recommend getting a few more pairs of eyes on it before pursuing FA status, if you intend to. File:Melia azedarach 01434.jpg could do with an English description, but, other than that, images are great. Nice work! J Milburn (talk) 15:04, 7 June 2014 (UTC)
- Thanks! Are you suggesting peer review? FunkMonk (talk) 15:23, 7 June 2014 (UTC)
- Peer review can be a bit unreliable. There are a good number of biology editors around who may be happy to take a look through for you- people like Jimfbleak, Casliber, Cwmhiraeth, Ucucha and Chiswick Chap (I'm sure there are others) have all worked on topics more or less like this, so perhaps asking them directly would be good. J Milburn (talk) 16:00, 7 June 2014 (UTC)