Talk:Willow ptarmigan/GA1

GA Review

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch

Reviewer: FunkMonk (talk · contribs) 23:35, 30 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, Cwmhiraeth, fairly long time since I last reviewed a bird article, so I'll take this one. FunkMonk (talk) 23:35, 30 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
First off, last sentence under description needs a source, likewise with the part about hybridisation (could need a link) under taxonomy.

Thank you for taking this on. I have added one citation and removed one sentence to which I could not find a reference. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 11:00, 31 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The etymology lacks a source as well.

Done. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 12:59, 1 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

It strikes me as odd that there is no habitat and distribution section? And instead, there seems to be bits and pieces about habitat sprinkled about, mostly in the description section for some reason? Could this be collected?

Done. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 12:59, 1 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

There is still a bit about habitat under description, but perhaps it's there for a reason? FunkMonk (talk) 15:06, 1 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

"(though the red grouse does not adopt a winter plumage)" Why use an obsolete name, and not just say the British population or some such? And if you keep it, shouldn't it be capitalised?

Done. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 12:59, 1 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

"but in the winter they are white with black tails" From the photo, it appears the head and neck is black as well? And the tail is not really black?

What? Deducing facts from images? ;-) The text sources mention some black feathers in the tail so I have edited these statements. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 12:59, 1 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Heheh, should be ok as long as you don't cite the image itself! Reading/looking closer, I'm also confused by the fact that the male on an image has a black head and white body, though the text says it would be all white. Any reason for this? FunkMonk (talk) 15:06, 1 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Well I guess that there may be some variation in the winter plumage across the range. Most of the websites I have found are US based and presumably really only cover the birds found there. Then again, the bird seems to change its plumage several times a year, new feathers growing through its old plumage, so it is frequently changing its appearance. I could state that the winter plumage is largely white but varies between subspecies. What do you think? Cwmhiraeth (talk) 18:37, 1 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I think mentioning the variation under description is good. FunkMonk (talk) 23:46, 1 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

"most numerous of the three species of Ptarmigan" Should it even be capitalised here, as it is not referring to a particular species?

Done. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 12:59, 1 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The word ptarmigan is neither linked or explained what it refers to.

Done. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 13:36, 1 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

"Hybridises often with Tetrao tetrix and Bonasa bonasia" It/The Willow Ptarmigan hybridises often? Otherwise it seems like how one would write a brief field guide or something, but we have plenty of space to use.

Expanded. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 13:36, 1 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

"retreated northwards like its tundra habitat." With its tundra habitat?

Done. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 13:36, 1 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I don't see why the gallery is needed. Unless there is a specific point to be conveyed, the MOS states they shouldn't be used.

Removed. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 13:36, 1 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Likewise, the image layout is a bit funny. No image under description? Three on the left of the bullet points under taxonomy?

There's not much room for an image in the Description section because it would pinch the text or continue down into the next section if on the right. The 3 images on the left of Taxonomy illustrate different subspecies. I could put them all on the right. I could look for an image of dwarf willow for the Diet section. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 13:36, 1 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Sounds good, at least to see how it would look like with that layout. We can always change it back. FunkMonk (talk) 15:08, 1 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I have done some image rearrangement. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 18:37, 1 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I think it looks better. FunkMonk (talk) 00:00, 2 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

If any of the subspecies are downright invalid now, they should be listed as synonyms instead, and the ones that are somewhat agreed upon should stay in the taxonomy section.

I'm happy to accept what it says on the IBC page. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 18:37, 1 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Interesting it also is present in America. Any source mention when this was colonised by the bird?

It's not far from Siberia to Alaska. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 18:37, 1 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

A lot of info about diet is present under behaviour, why is that not in the diet section?

Moved and abbreviated to remove duplication. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 18:37, 1 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The intro says "in a scrape on the ground". The article says "in a shallow depression in the ground". Should be consistent.

Done. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 18:37, 1 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Looks good now, only thing is habitat is still mentioned for some populations under description, would make more sense under the newly created section? FunkMonk (talk) 00:00, 2 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I've had another look at this. The habitat is only mentioned in the Description section inasmuch as it is attached to the mention of other species with which the Willow Ptarmigan might be confused. I have moved the bit about the habitat of the Red Grouse. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 05:11, 3 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Alright, pass! FunkMonk (talk) 06:36, 3 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the review. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 09:02, 3 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]