Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Pale Crag Martin/archive1
- The following is an archived discussion of a featured article nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured article candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.
The article was promoted by GrahamColm 17:13, 9 December 2012 [1].
Pale Crag Martin (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
Toolbox |
---|
- Nominator(s): Jimfbleak - talk to me? 10:54, 26 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Only seven swallow FAs, must be time for another one! Unlike my last two FACs, this species isn't (a) extinct or (b) restricted to war-torn Congo, so there's a bit more content than in those articles. Jimfbleak - talk to me? 10:54, 26 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support from Maralia This looks great. I fixed a few typos. There were a couple of bits that I didn't quite understand:
- The second paragraph of the taxonomy section was a tough read for me. I think the numbers were part of the cause—first four species, then three groupings, and then a separate list of four at the end. Not sure how to improve this.
- And this is a simplified version of the tricky taxonomy of this group! I've tweaked a little and removed one of the numbers Jimfbleak - talk to me? 07:19, 27 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- The first sentence of the next paragraph ("The genus Ptyonoprogne is closely related to the larger swallow genus Hirundo, but a DNA analysis showed that a coherent enlarged Hirundo genus should contain all the mud-builder genera.") also threw me. It seemed like maybe 'and' would be more appropriate than 'or', but on second thought I'm not sure I understand it at all.
- I've rewritten this with shorter sentences and, I hope, a clearer exposition of the ideas Jimfbleak - talk to me? 07:19, 27 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
You might consider moving the wikispecies & commons links higher up on the page since they're more relevant than the navigation templates that precede them. The picture of the eggs could use an alt text description, too. An excellent article; well done! Maralia (talk) 06:57, 27 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Moved wikispecies & commons links, added alt to eggs Jimfbleak - talk to me? 07:19, 27 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Thanks very much for your review, comments and support. Jimfbleak - talk to me? 07:19, 27 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Image review from Crisco 1492
- File:Ptyonoprogne fuligula 1 cropped.jpg - License is fine, but that is (for this non-bird oriented editor) terrible for identification. Why not include something like File:Ptyonoprogne fuligula 1894.jpg in the article as well, at least so we can get an idea of what the top looks like?
- File:Pale Crag-martin.ogg looks fine
- File:Ptyonoprogne obsoleta MHNT.jpg looks fine.
- File:Ptyonoprogneobsoletamap.png looks fine
- File:City of Aswan seen from the air.jpg - I'm going to AGF this, as it appears the uploader was fairly active and respected. Not crazy about the web resolution, but...
- Why do some files show Ptyonoprogne obsoleta and others show Ptyonoprogne fuligula? These are different categories too.
- Thanks for the image review. Taking the last point first, Pale Crag Martin Ptyonoprogne obsoleta was formerly often considered to be a subspecies of the Rock Martin Ptyonoprogne fuligula, but more recently it has become usual to split it as a separate species, including by the International Ornithological Committee which is the Bird Project's taxonomy standard. That's why I've written this FAC, because all the other genus members are GA or FA already. File:Ptyonoprogne fuligula 1894.jpg is definitely a Rock Martin, unfortunately wrong species, and as you probably realise there is nothing else free. The change in taxonomy also explains why the files have different binomial names, and why the definite Pale Crag Martin in Egypt has the "old" binomial. I put in the Aswan image because it's a martin's eye view of a city mentioned in one of the sources. It's not essential, so if it becomes an issue, it's easy to remove. Jimfbleak - talk to me? 15:19, 28 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Alright, in that case I can't see anything to pick at here. Renaming might be a good idea for File:Ptyonoprogne fuligula 1 cropped.jpg though, if you are certain of the identification. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 15:23, 28 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- I moved the flight image to File:Ptyonoprogneobsoleta 1 cropped.jpg Jimfbleak - talk to me? 15:28, 28 November 2012 (UTC) [reply]
Addressed prose comments from Crisco 1492 moved to talk
- Support on prose and images. A solid, readily comprehensible article on a topic I'm sure many people would not know about otherwise. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 09:59, 29 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Many thanks for support, I'll have to write more swallow articles ;) Jimfbleak - talk to me? 10:57, 29 November 2012 (UTC) [reply]
Support, very nice. I made a few small changes. One comment-
- "The argasid tick Hyalomma marginatum was found in nests on a sarcophagus and an ancient tomb in Egypt. This tick has been implicated in the transmission of Bahig virus, a pathogenic arbovirus previously thought to be transmitted by mosquitoes.[40]" Presumably, this is a virus which affects the Pale Crag Martin? It's not clear what this section has to do with the article subject.
- I've tried to tweak this a bit. The point is that this virus was formally though to be spread only by mosquitoes. Its presence in ticks in the Pale Crag Martin nests suggests that it could also be transmitted via bird-borne ticks. I'm wary of spelling this out because it comes close to OR by synthesis Jimfbleak - talk to me? 08:19, 29 November 2012 (UTC) [reply]
Other than that, very strong. J Milburn (talk) 21:17, 28 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- many thanks for review, fixes and support Jimfbleak - talk to me? 08:19, 29 November 2012 (UTC) [reply]
Sources review
- Ref 15: Space needed after "Rose"
- Ref 31: needs more specific publisher information than "Desert cave project", which does not seem to be the name of an organisation
- You may want to add the OCLC for the Baker 1926 book. It's 312198707
- In the Cited texts section the publication year is missing from Harris et al
No spotchecks carried out. Subject to the above minor fixes, sources and citations look fine. Brianboulton (talk) 22:23, 28 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Thanks for the review and the OCLC. I've fixed the technical bits, not sure about the Desert Cave Project. It's the title for all the www.saudicaves.com web pages, and I've linked through to the home page in the ref. Who are we shows it's a stand-alone website, but the bird page I've referenced in the article is written by Michael Jennings, author of Atlas of the Breeding Birds of Arabia (see "Cited texts"), and publisher of the Phoenix journal of Arabian birds, so you can't get a more authoritative source. Jimfbleak - talk to me? 07:51, 29 November 2012 (UTC) [reply]
Support. Well-written and appears to cover all the major aspects of the topic. Ucucha (talk) 15:57, 1 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Thanks for the review and support Jimfbleak - talk to me? 16:33, 1 December 2012 (UTC) [reply]
Support. Reads good, and I couldn't think of anything to add in the text. There's still the lack of images showing the upper part of the bird itself, which is a bit of a shame. How about this drawing?[2] Other than that, I found this[3], which is kind of useless though. FunkMonk (talk) 18:26, 4 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Thanks for review and support, I've moved the Sharpe image to the taxobox and the previous taxobox image to Feeding, The Flickr image isn't really good enough to use Jimfbleak - talk to me? 07:00, 5 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Now that's what I'm talking about! I fixed the tag for you. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 07:09, 5 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Thanks again! Jimfbleak - talk to me? 07:41, 5 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Thanks for review and support, I've moved the Sharpe image to the taxobox and the previous taxobox image to Feeding, The Flickr image isn't really good enough to use Jimfbleak - talk to me? 07:00, 5 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.