Talk:Eucteniza/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Delldot (talk · contribs) 16:17, 20 October 2015 (UTC)

This article is basically a thing of beauty. It seems fairly comprehensive given how little is known about these guys. I love the images, which all check out.

• Throughout, if it would be possible to do some copyediting to remove technical, jargony-sounding language, that would be good. e.g. I believe "and/or" is discouraged. But overall good job defining unfamiliar terms inline.
  • I believe most technical terms are either linked or defined in parentheses. --Animalparty! (talk) 23:26, 21 October 2015 (UTC)
    • My understanding is that even if a term is wikilinked it's better to define it in the sentence, that way the reader doesn't have to leave the article to understand the sentence. It's been a while though, is your understanding different? delldot ∇. 23:39, 21 October 2015 (UTC)
      • I've reduced some technical terms, can you identify any others that are undefined or unclear in context? I try to make technical articles understandable, but biological articles often do contain technical content. I may have a skewed view of what's understandable, but I don't want to clutter the article too much with parentheticals and tangential definitions, as that can impede readability. --Animalparty! (talk) 01:39, 22 October 2015 (UTC)
        • This is perfect now. delldot ∇. 02:46, 22 October 2015 (UTC)
• Can the lead be expanded at all? How about predator info?
  • I think the lead includes sufficient general information. All predation info stems from a single, rather preliminary report, so I'm leery of giving it much or any weight in the lead. --Animalparty! (talk) 23:26, 21 October 2015 (UTC)
• In the Description section, I think you should spell out exactly what claspers and preening combs are for (if possible). How does the spider use them?
  • Claspers are for clasping females. Neither claspers nor preening combs are explicitly defined in the references; I may have to find a glossary or general spider text that addresses these. But I'm wary of inferring too much behavior that isn't documented. --Animalparty! (talk) 23:26, 21 October 2015 (UTC)
• The Predators section is kind of tiny, and leaves the reader wondering. What do the Pepsis do after they leave the spiders in their burrows? Is there anything you can add?
  • The Pepsis information is the only predation/parasitism info I could find, and the source is short on details. Tarantula hawk explains the biology of the wasps in more detail, and it could be presumed that Eucteniza individuals have a similar fate, but I can't infer things that aren't reliably documented. --Animalparty! (talk) 23:26, 21 October 2015 (UTC)
• I think this sentence would be clearer if it were split to deal with the two species separately: In 1895, the English zoologist and reverend Octavius Pickard-Cambridge described the new genera Favila[a] and Enrico (named after a Gothic duke and a Gothic ruler), for the new species relatus and mexicanus, respectively. → In 1895, the English zoologist and reverend Octavius Pickard-Cambridge described the new genera Favila (named after a Gothic duke) for the new species relatus and Enrico (named after a Gothic ruler), for mexicanus.
  • I've reworked it a little, and relegated some etymology to footnotes to lessen clutter.

That is pretty much all I got. Let me know if you disagree with any of these suggestions, I'm not married to any of them. Excellent work so far! delldot ∇. 16:17, 20 October 2015 (UTC)

@Delldot: Thanks for your review! I've made some changes to the article, and addressed your comments here. Let me know how things look now. --Animalparty! (talk) 23:26, 21 October 2015 (UTC)

I think everything's been addressed. I did have one more question after rereading: Am I missing something here or would the meaning be exactly the same with the second sentence removed? The genus Eucteniza was established by Austrian naturalist Anton Ausserer in 1875 with the description of Eucteniza mexicana. Ausserer established Eucteniza.

I'm going to let you figure that one out but I'll go ahead and promote in the mean time. delldot ∇. 02:46, 22 October 2015 (UTC)

Good catch- that second sentence was left over from some recent pruning. I've removed it. --Animalparty! (talk) 03:25, 22 October 2015 (UTC)