Talk:King African mole-rat/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Sasata (talk) 00:52, 31 March 2010 (UTC)

Comments:

• lead: please mention (i.e. explicitly) if the distribution is restricted to Mount Kenya
  • Done.
• prose tweak: "…it is classified as the same species as T. splendens by some." -> "…some consider it the same species as T. splendens."
  • Done.
• "It is a very large, brownish species." how large?
  • Included some measurements.
• "The young are dark with white patches." where are the patches?
  • Underparts, added.
• links to Edmund Heller and Ned Hollister?
  • Done.
• etymology for rex?
  • No one tells it. I guess it's the king of mole-rats because it is one of the largest.
• I'm not sure what the reader is supposed to learn from the hair pic. Is is structurally different than regular rat hairs?
  • I'm not sure either; the source doesn't say much about the hairs of T. rex. I figured I'd put in whatever picture of the animal I could get.
    • I'm ambivalent about its usefulness. I won't be reverting if someone else decides to take it out. Ideally, some Kenyan of the future with a digital camera will read this article and climb a mountain for us. Sasata (talk) 05:08, 31 March 2010 (UTC)
      • I guess so. I think we'd rather hope for that Kenyan to take a photo of the animal instead of just a few hairs.
• "Young animals are dark-furred, with some irregular white areas." irregular in what way? Shape?
  • I think so, but Hollister says nothing more than this.
• "…and has the capsule of the incisor placed further to the front." I checked out the linked article to find out what this capsule was, but to no avail. What is it?
  • I wonder; this is what Heller writes, but I'm none too familiar with anatomical terms for Tachyoryctes. I guessed it might be the capsular process seen in rice rats (as in the bulge in File:Oryzomys palustris mandible.png above the "8"), but I can't see that at all in the mandible of T. rex. I think I'd best leave it at this, since it's what the source has to tell.
• I'd suggest inserting one of the pics available in the Mount Kenya article to show the habitat, but there's not a lot of room…
  • No room, I think—on my screen, the taxobox is already as long as the entire text.
• not part of this review, but you might wanna add a link to this article from the Mount Kenya article in the fauna section
  • Done.
• "A female found on October 5 had a large embryo." this sentence just seems thrown in there, with no context. Why is the date important? Why is the embryo size important? What was it large in comparison to?
  • It subtly suggests that their breeding season probably includes September; that it was large suggests that the pregnancy of the female had proceeded a little already. The sources have nothing more to say.
• "In other chambers,[8]" I'm confused about the placement of this citation.does [8] cite the previous two sentences plus the three words shown here?
  • It did, but I changed it to something more logical.
• "The animal eat plant roots." like what, typically?
  • The source doesn't say.
• anything good in this?:

Title: THE MAMMALS OF THE NORTHERN SLOPES OF MT KENYA

Author(s): COE M J; FOSTER J B

Source: Journal of the East Africa Natural History Society and National Museum Volume: 131 Pages: 1-18 Published: 1972

• I haven't seen it, but the Zoological Record data suggest it only concerns altitudinal distribution, which we already have. Musser and Carleton don't find it important enough to cite either, and they generally cite pertinent papers for the other Tachyoryctes. I can have a look the next time I am in the library, but don't think it should be needed for GA.

• this source calls it the "Alpine Mole Rat"
  • By none other than Theodore Roosevelt. Added.
• If it jives with your other sources, I think the distribution section should mention "the Aberdare Range to the west of Mt Kenya"
  • That's about T. audax, not T. rex.
• don't you want to mention that the type specimen was collected by the field naturalist J. Alden Loring who was part of a scientific expedition to Africa along with Theodore Roosevelt? C'mon, that's good stuff!
  • It is.
    • That redlinked Smithsonian African Expedition sounds like it has the potential to be a cool article. Sasata (talk) 05:08, 31 March 2010 (UTC)
• might want to mention that the pee/poop/plant matter chambers generate considerable heat
  • Don't know why I left that out.
• "Its presence results in a change in vegetation on the mounds, which have fewer grasses and more woody plants." might want to add [http://books.google.com/books?id=YJFB4l262WkC&lpg=PA333&dq=Tachyoryctes%20rex&lr=&pg=PA333#v=onepage&q=Tachyoryctes%20rex&f=false "… We do not know whether the vegetation associated with their burrows is due to belowground herbivory or to edaphic differences in mound soil."
  • Same.
    • "... because of the animal's eating plant roots" =noun+ing
      • Fixed.

Thanks for another thorough review and for the check of the sources. Ucucha 02:03, 31 March 2010 (UTC)

Another rat rises in the ranks: Sasata (talk) 05:08, 31 March 2010 (UTC)

GA review (see here for criteria)

1. It is reasonably well written.

   a (prose): b (MoS):

   Concise; well-written; complies with MoS.

2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.

   a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c(OR):

   Well-cited to reliable sources.

3. It is broad in its coverage.

   a (major aspects): b (focused):

   A comprehensive treament of a little-known species.

4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.

   Fair representation without bias:

5. It is stable.

   No edit wars etc.:

6. It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate.

   a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):

   Two images, both PD.

7. Overall:

   Pass/Fail:

Thanks again. Just in time for its April Fools' DYK. :) Ucucha 05:13, 31 March 2010 (UTC)