Talk:Milk shark

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
WikiProject Sharks (Rated GA-class, Mid-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Sharks, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of sharks on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
 GA  This article has been rated as GA-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Mid  This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
 
Good article Milk 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.
Article milestones
Date Process Result
September 29, 2009 Good article nominee Listed
Did You Know

== Copyright problem removed == ----------------------------------



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. -- ascidian | talk-to-me 00:12, 24 March 2009 (UTC)

GA Review[edit]

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

Nice work again. I did some light copyedits, check to make sure I didn't alter the meaning; a few minor quibbles follow. Sasata (talk) 17:13, 28 September 2009 (UTC)

  • "hyomandibular pores" could use linking or explaining
  • Removed "hyomandibular"; all that refers to is where the pores are, which is already explained in the sentence.
  • "Smaller sharks eat proportionately more cephalopods and crustaceans, transitioning to fish as they grow older." Suggest recasting sentence, might be incorrectly interpreted as sharks turn into fish as they get older
  • Changed to "switching to fish"
  • "There is some evidence that male and female milk sharks segregate from each other." Not 100% clear what this means, they like to hang out separately? (Actually I am clear, but think maybe it could be reworded slightly differently) meh, it sounds okay after brain is awoken by coffee
  • "Females do not store sperm internally." Do other female sharks typically do this?
  • Some do (off the top of my head, blue sharks, dusky sharks, and Australian swellsharks can), though I don't know about its overall prevalence across species.
  • "This species is also one of the most important sharks caught off Senegal, Mauritania, Oman, and India." commercially important?
  • Word added.

Let me know of any other issues. -- Yzx (talk) 00:09, 29 September 2009 (UTC)

Just one thing, basal goes go a dab page. Other than that, sources check out, and links validity check is ok. I'll let you deal with the dab, and promote the article in the meantime. Sasata (talk) 03:18, 29 September 2009 (UTC)
Fixed and thanks! -- Yzx (talk) 03:43, 29 September 2009 (UTC)
GA review (see here for criteria)
  1. It is reasonably well written.
    a (prose): b (MoS):
Prose is clear and concise; article complies with MOS.
  1. It is factually accurate and verifiable.
    a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c(OR):
    Sources are reliable; article is well-cited.
  2. It is broad in its coverage.
    a (major aspects): b (focused):
    Coverage comparable to other GA-quality shark articles.
  3. It follows the neutral point of view policy.
    Fair representation without bias:
  4. It is stable.
    No edit wars etc.:
  5. It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate.
    a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
    All images have appropriate free use licenses.
  6. Overall:
    Pass/Fail:

Expiry[edit]

In want to discuss on expiry product Boeua (talk) 10:18, 22 July 2016 (UTC)