Talk:Anomochilus

GA Review

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:Anomochilus/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Chiswick Chap (talk · contribs) 11:04, 21 July 2023 (UTC)

Comments

I'll take this one. Chiswick Chap (talk) 11:04, 21 July 2023 (UTC)

This is a well-written and fully-cited article with an appropriate structure, so there is rather little that needs to be said about it.

• "preoccupied", hm, yes, I guess so, but why not just say "was already in use"? (I think "preoccupied" is at least half-redundant with the existing "already", too.)
  • Done.

• I appreciate that it's hard to get images of these secretive snakes, but It's not ideal using the same image in the lead and in the table, specially below a blank space for one of the other species. It might be better to remove the image column altogether, and move the remaining image of A. weberi to the top of the "Description" section.
  • I'm currently trying to get a photo of leonardi from iNaturalist, if it takes more than a week or so I'll remove the section.

• Please link paraphyletic.
  • Done.

• The discussion of relatives and clades would be much better with the support of a cladogram. I see there is one in [11], from which only a small part needs to be taken for this article's purposes.
  • Added a cladogram.
    • Thanks. I think you could root it in the Alethinophidia?
      • I'm not sure; it only depicts part of the family, so wouldn't that be a little misleading?
        • OK, I guess you could say "Part of ...", or else label the root and add another branch for "other families" to indicate incompleteness (I think I'd do the latter) so at least we have a root. No worries.

• "diet consists of elongate invertebrates like earthworms and perhaps on small, slim vertebrates " --- the "on" should be "also of".
  • Done.

• "give birth to live young": please wikilink to Viviparity.
  • Done.

• The images on Commons are appropriately licensed.

• All the sources are suitable, mainly primary research papers.

• Spot-checks are all ok.

Summary

This article is basically ready for GA and merely needs attention to the few points mentioned above. Chiswick Chap (talk) 14:34, 21 July 2023 (UTC)

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.

Did you know nomination

The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was: promoted by AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 09:42, 22 August 2023 (UTC)

(

• Comment or view
• Article history

)

• ... that depending on who you ask, an anomochilid could be a dwarf or a giant? Source: O'Shea, Mark (2023). Snakes of the World: A Guide to Every Family. Princeton: Princeton University Press. Das, Indraneil (2010). Field Guide to the Reptiles of South-East Asia. London: New Holland Publishers.
  • Reviewed: Template:Did you know nominations/Plácido Ramón de Torres

Improved to Good Article status by AryKun (talk). Self-nominated at 15:57, 28 July 2023 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/Anomochilus; consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.

General: Article is new enough and long enough
New enough: Long enough:

Policy: Article is sourced, neutral, and free of copyright problems
Adequate sourcing: Neutral: Free of copyright violations, plagiarism, and close paraphrasing:

Hook: Hook has been verified by provided inline citation
Cited: Interesting:

QPQ: Done.

Overall: Good article, passes earwig, and is adequately sourced. No close paraphrasing was found, and the hook is very interesting, cited inline, and verified. QPQ done. Nom good to go. Pseud 14 (talk) 15:43, 29 July 2023 (UTC)