Wikipedia

Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Mourning Dove

< Wikipedia:Featured article candidates
The following is an archived discussion of a featured article nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured article review. No further edits should be made to this page.

The article was promoted 03:44, 23 February 2007.

Mourning Dove edit

1st PR
1st FAC
2nd PR

Second time self nomination. I withdrew the first nomination because the reviews thought the writing could be better. After a second peer review I feel that it meets the criteria now. Miss Madeline | Talk to Madeline 00:21, 8 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

  • Comment, the article is crowded with images, some duplicating that which is already shown. Image galleries are for the commons, not the wikipedia main namespace. Why is the lead in four parts; I think given the size of the article it is too long and its content is directly repeated later. The as a symbol and in the arts section should be in prose, but bullets could be effectively used to delineate the 5 subspecies in the taxonomy section.--Peta 00:40, 8 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    • Disagree strongly as to the article having "too many images". Bird identification may not be the primary function of a Wikipedia entry, but it is nonetheless a significant factor - and one that is facilitated greatly by the inclusion of high-quality imagery showing different variations of the species, from different angles, and in different lighting conditions. This article is a good example of how these types of entries should be done. 'Card
    • That should be done now. Miss Madeline | Talk to Madeline 01:31, 8 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
      • Support, thanks for making those changes. One minor thing, is a birds call a part of its physical description or a behaviour? --Peta 03:21, 9 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Reply: The call seems to be placed in description rather than behaviour generally. I conitnued that in some corvid articles. Now to have a better squiz at this one......Cas Liber 12:26, 11 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support: a little short but I can't see what else should be in there. I feel it satisfies all criteria though I do like ref footnotes in smaller sized scripts as on the dino FA articles. Also the heading "Physical description"; the word "physical" is redundant (what other type of description is there?) - I have removed the first word on loads of dino, bird, plant and fungi pages. cheers Cas Liber 12:31, 11 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Object - Comprehensiveness. What is the etymology of the name? Why "Mourning" dove? The last section about artistic use is too short, and I feel more could be written there. Fieari 20:51, 13 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The naming thing, and the paragraphing of that section have been fixed.Sfahey 03:56, 18 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • weak Oppose needs a copy edit, common incident is with Inches it should be dab to Inch. The flight speed 88km/hour, what is that in mph? while on that 88 km/hour should be written as kilometre per hour or km/h. Gnangarra 15:10, 14 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Taxonomy and distribution these should be seperate sections, also there 6 links in this section that go to redirects. Gnangarra 15:23, 14 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I have bypassed a few redirects, made the suggested changes to the units of measurement and added the etymology. Emu (which is the source for section names in this article) has the section Taxonomy and distribution, so there is no particular problem with using that as a section. Miss Madeline | Talk to Madeline 00:14, 18 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured article review. No further edits should be made to this page.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Featured_article_candidates/Mourning_Dove&oldid=192335093"