Talk:Barndoor skate
| This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Barndoor skate article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
| Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
 | Barndoor skate 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. | ||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||
 | A fact from this article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the "Did you know?" column on November 18, 2006. The text of the entry was: Did you know ...that the barndoor skate (pictured) is a species of fish that is threatened with extinction from overfishing despite not being targeted by the commercial fishing industry? | ||||||||||||
| Current status: Good article | |||||||||||||
 | This article is rated GA-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||
| |||||||||||
2006 NOAA Press release edit
In mid-2006, NOAA published a press release in which it stated that it was no longer considering the barndoor skate an "overfished species". I have been unable to locate any information relating to reactions from conservationists and scientists familiar with the species. If anybody can find such reactions, it would be a great addition to the paragraph in the "conservation" section relating to this. Neil916 (Talk) 00:25, 18 November 2006 (UTC)
GA nomination edit
I've passed this article for GA. Good work. Only thing I'd suggest is finding a photo of the skate or something. Other then that well written, well referenced, neutral and balanced. - Shudda talk 00:12, 21 November 2006 (UTC)
GA Reassessment edit
- This discussion is transcluded from Talk:Barndoor skate/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the reassessment.
GA Sweeps: Pass edit
As part of the WikiProject Good Articles, we're doing sweeps to go over all of the current GAs and see if they still meet the GA criteria. I went through the article and made various changes, please look them over. I believe the article currently meets the criteria and should remain listed as a Good article. Altogether the article is well-written and is still in great shape after its passing in 2006. Continue to improve the article making sure all new information is properly sourced and neutral. It would be beneficial to update the access dates for the sources. If you have any questions, let me know on my talk page and I'll get back to you as soon as I can. I have updated the article history to reflect this review. --Happy editing! Nehrams2020 (talk • contrib) 00:16, 31 May 2009 (UTC)