Talk:Lycodon cathaya

Lycodon cathaya 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.
Review: January 13, 2025. (Reviewed version).

Amphibians and Reptiles Low‑importance

	Lycodon cathaya is part of WikiProject Amphibians and Reptiles, an effort to make Wikipedia a standardized, informative, comprehensive and easy-to-use resource for amphibians and reptiles. If you would like to participate, you can choose to edit this article, or visit the project page for more information.Amphibians and ReptilesWikipedia:WikiProject Amphibians and ReptilesTemplate:WikiProject Amphibians and Reptilesamphibian and reptile
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

lenght

this snake is NOT 9 meters long. Please correct.

Wjeanpierre44, the holotype is significantly smaller, with a TL of 5.6 m, but the second specimen that the authors describe is indeed over 9 m long according to them. AryKun (talk) 06:06, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Whoops, sorry for my negligence in reading the source, you are indeed right that the snake is not 9 m long. Fixed now. AryKun (talk) 22:33, 12 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

GA Review

Passed. Chiswick Chap (talk) 03:17, 13 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

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

Nominator: AryKun (talk · contribs) 20:34, 11 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Reviewer: Chiswick Chap (talk · contribs) 20:07, 12 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

All the length are an order of magnitude too large. The snake is not up to 9 metres long (eek!), it's 90 cm: you have written cm where you mean mm, throughout (both in lead and in Description).

Fixed, don't know how I didn't realize that I was describing Titanaboa Jr.

I've done some very minor copy-editing.

Much appreciated.

monotypic plant genus Cathaya - perhaps "monotypic pine tree genus ~thaya"

Changed.

The Mandarin common name apparently means "Huaping White Ring Snake", which would be nice to add.

Added; does translating names count as OR if no other source outright states the translation?

All the sources check out.

This is a necessarily small article on a recently-discovered species, with inevitably few sources. Its notability is not in question so there is no problem here.

All the images are from Wang and colleagues. The ZooKeys website states that all its materials are CC-by-SA 4.0.

Once the small details above are fixed this'll be a GA.

Chiswick Chap, thanks for the review, see responses above. AryKun (talk) 22:31, 12 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.