Talk:Telopea truncata/GA1
Appearance
GA Review[edit]
GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch
Reviewer: J Milburn (talk · contribs) 10:12, 31 October 2015 (UTC)
Happy to offer a review. Josh Milburn (talk) 10:12, 31 October 2015 (UTC)
- "James Ross gave it the name Telopea tasmaniana in his Hobart Town Almanack in 1835.[2]" It's a little jarring to leave this "unchallenged"- readers may wonder about the "status" of this name.
- "It is the earliest offshoot of a lineage that gives rise to the Gippsland waratah (T. oreades) and Monga waratah (T. mongaensis) of southeastern mainland Australia.[5] The perianths" Several things could do with being linked, here?
- "The genus is classified in the subtribe Embothriinae of the Proteaceae, along with the tree waratahs (Alloxylon) from eastern Australia and New Caledonia, and Oreocallis and the Chilean firetree (Embothrium coccineum) from South America." A bit clumsy
- Is Triporopollenites ambiguus worth linking? Don't be scared of redlinking!
- "Unlike the more familiar New South Wales waratah" What do you mean by this?
- I expanded a little to clarify - hopefully sufficiently. Does it make sense? Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 10:18, 1 November 2015 (UTC)
- "Obovate to spathulate in shape, they have entire (smooth) slightly downcurved (recurved) margins.[2] The undersurface of the leaves is hairy. Occasional lobed leaves are seen." A bit jargony. "raceme", too.
- "though sporadic yellow-flowered plants occur" It's unclear what "sporadic" means in this context. It can probably be removed, as it's specified in the next sentence.
- "These were described as forma lutea but have no taxonomic status, as they appear sporadically and are mere colour variations" This is a bit jargony (specifically, "forma" and "taxonomic status")
- The second half of the second paragraph of the description section could probably be smoothed out a little
- Nothofagus gunnii redirects to a different name. Also, what's "short" rainforest?
- "which is fed on by many species" Species of what? Also, should that be upon?
- In the ecology section, you could perhaps merge the first and last paragraphs and merge the middle two.
The sources look mostly fine- I'm not going to quibble about formatting/consistency. The pictures are excellent. Josh Milburn (talk) 11:30, 31 October 2015 (UTC)
- my daughter now has a boyfriend in Tasmania, so have taken her down there a couple of times recently....and snuck off and done a few walks and taken some nice photos, and dumped on commons. You are welcome to look at the images and let me know which are the best/most educational/visual etc. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 00:27, 3 November 2015 (UTC)
- The pictures in the article at the moment are good- as a general comment, I would say that pictures of the full plants (not just close up of the flowers) would be nice to include, but this one has some (though, admittedly, smaller ones). In any case, I'm happy to promote at this time. Great work! Josh Milburn (talk) 14:47, 7 November 2015 (UTC)
- my daughter now has a boyfriend in Tasmania, so have taken her down there a couple of times recently....and snuck off and done a few walks and taken some nice photos, and dumped on commons. You are welcome to look at the images and let me know which are the best/most educational/visual etc. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 00:27, 3 November 2015 (UTC)