Talk:Meratus blue flycatcher
Meratus blue flycatcher is currently a Biology and medicine good article nominee. Nominated by AryKun (talk) at 09:37, 24 July 2024 (UTC) An editor has placed this article on hold to allow improvements to be made to satisfy the good article criteria. Recommendations have been left on the review page, and editors have seven days to address these issues. Improvements made in this period will influence the reviewer's decision whether or not to list the article as a good article. Short description: Species of bird |
A fact from Meratus blue flycatcher appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know column on 30 March 2024 (check views). The text of the entry was as follows:
|
Did you know nomination
edit- 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 13:00, 23 March 2024 (UTC)
- ... that the Meratus blue flycatcher (male pictured) was first recorded from Indonesian songbird markets in 2022, despite only having been discovered six years earlier? Source: BirdLife International (2022). "Cyornis kadayangensis". IUCN Red List of Threatened Species. 2022: e.T216557368A217110468.
5x expanded by AryKun (talk). Self-nominated at 18:59, 29 February 2024 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/Meratus blue flycatcher; consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.
- starting review--Kevmin § 21:36, 10 March 2024 (UTC)
- Article expansion new enough and more than long enough. Article well cited, and sources neutral and used in a non=pov manner. Cornell website information taken AGF as membership locked. Image is mainpage compliant and distinct in thumb. The hook is interesting and verified to source for the songbird market half, but we will need a citation added closer the the 2016 sighting statement in the article per DYK rules.--Kevmin § 16:16, 12 March 2024 (UTC)
- @Kevmin: Added the ref; you can verify the 2016 date with either the 2016 Eaton paper or 2022 Irham paper, both of which are freely available on G Scholar. More interestingly, the IUCN writes "its discovery in the Meratus Mountains [...] in 2015", despite every other source agreeing on the July 2016 expedition being the first sighting of it. The 2015 date is definitely wrong and probably either a typo or a lapsus, so should it be noted in the article? AryKun (talk) 11:17, 17 March 2024 (UTC)
- With the citations after the 2016 date, the article is ready to go, meeting DKY and WP criteria. AryKun, if there is a neutral way to note the date discrepancy in the article, go for it, maybe something along the lines of "... while the IUCN lists the original sighting as 2015, Source 1, 2, etc. are in agreement that the sightings were in 2016".--Kevmin § 19:47, 17 March 2024 (UTC)
Question re: DYK
edit@AirshipJungleman29, @AryKun, @Kevmin; I'm a little confused by the wording of this DYK. It was discovered in 2016, and described in 2021, but only recorded in 2022? Is "recorded" being used very literally here to mean "video or audio recorded"? And "despite" is also confusing - is a six year gap typical? Atypical? I think this hook needs an overhaul. —Ganesha811 (talk) 11:30, 28 March 2024 (UTC).
- No, "recorded from Indonesian songbird markets in 2022", as in first documented from said markets in 2022. I thought it was interesting that it was being trafficked in the wildlife trade so soon after its discovery. AryKun (talk) 11:46, 28 March 2024 (UTC)
- Ok, I see what you mean. I don't think the current hook gets that across very clearly. How about .
..that only six years after its 2016 discovery, the Meratus blue flycatcher was found being sold in Indonesian songbird markets?
—Ganesha811 (talk) 11:54, 28 March 2024 (UTC)- Oh, I thought the "recorded" meant "the birdsong was recorded", so clarification would probably be helpful, yes. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 11:56, 28 March 2024 (UTC)
- Okay, that seems good. AryKun (talk) 14:29, 28 March 2024 (UTC)
- Cool, I've modified the hook accordingly. —Ganesha811 (talk) 15:19, 28 March 2024 (UTC)
- Ok, I see what you mean. I don't think the current hook gets that across very clearly. How about .
GA Review
editGA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
- This review is transcluded from Talk:Meratus blue flycatcher/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.
Nominator: AryKun (talk · contribs) 09:37, 24 July 2024 (UTC)
Reviewer: Simongraham (talk · contribs) 11:36, 28 July 2024 (UTC)
This looks another interesting article from AryKun and looks likely to be close to meeting the Good Article criteria. I will start a review shortly. simongraham (talk) 11:36, 28 July 2024 (UTC)
Comments
edit- Overall, the standard of the article is high.
- It is of adequate length, with 1,844 words of readable prose.
- The lead is reasonable given the length of the article at 209 words.
- Authorship is 93.2% from the nominator with contributions from 10 other editors.
- It is currently assessed as a B class article and a Did you know nomination.
Criteria
editThe six good article criteria:
- It is reasonable well written.
- the prose is clear, concise, and understandable to an appropriately broad audience; spelling and grammar are correct;
- The writing is clear and appropriate.
- Change "a" to "an" in "a expedition".
- Consider "from which" rather than "from where" in "which is close to the location from where many type specimens of the species were collected".
- Consider a comma before "and" in the independent clauses, such as "Some males may have dark blue on the flanks and one individual was seen with a solitary white retrix", "The lores are whitish and the slender eye-ring is buff-yellow", "The head to the nape (back of the neck) is streaked blackish and the nape to the rump is marked with blackish spots" and "It has a very small range and the authors of the study describing it recommended it be assessed as vulnerable".
- Please review "as well as the less extensive white on the underparts".
- I can see no other obvious spelling or grammar errors.
- it complies with the Manual of Style guidelines for lead, layout and word choice.
- It seems to comply with the Manuals of Style.
- the prose is clear, concise, and understandable to an appropriately broad audience; spelling and grammar are correct;
- It is factually accurate and verifiable.
- it contains a reference section, presented in accordance with the layout style guideline;
- A reference section is included, with sources listed.
- all inline citations are from reliable sources;
- Please add that Kirwan 2022 requires subscription.
- Spot checks confirm BirdLife International 2022, Irham et al 2022 and Jobling 2010 cover the topic.
- it contains no original research;
- All relevant statements have inline citations.
- it contains no copyright violations nor plagiarism;
- Earwig gives a 0.1% chance of copyright violation, which is extremely impressive.
- it contains a reference section, presented in accordance with the layout style guideline;
- It is broad in its coverage
- it addresses the main aspects of the topic.
- The article is compliant.
- it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style).
- The article is compliant.
- it addresses the main aspects of the topic.
- It has a neutral point of view.
- it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to different points of view.
- The article seems generally balanced and covers potentially controversial aspects like the songbird trade without bias.
- it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to different points of view.
- It is stable.
- it does not change significantly from day to day because of any ongoing edit war or content dispute.
- There is no evidence of edit wars.
- it does not change significantly from day to day because of any ongoing edit war or content dispute.
- It is illustrated by images and other media, where possible and appropriate.
- images are tagged with their copyright statuses, and valid fair use rationales are provided for non-free content;
- The images have been reviewed and have appropriate CC tags.
- images are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions.
- The images are appropriate. Although not a GA criteria, suggest adding ALT text for accessibility.
- images are tagged with their copyright statuses, and valid fair use rationales are provided for non-free content;
@AryKun: Thank you for an interesting article. Please take a look at my comments above and ping me when you would like me to take another look. simongraham (talk) 12:14, 28 July 2024 (UTC)