Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of erinaceids/archive1

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

The list was promoted by PresN via FACBot (talk) 00:25, 12 April 2024 (UTC) [1].[reply]

List of erinaceids edit

Featured list candidates/List of erinaceids/archive1

Nominator(s): Pres N 16:14, 16 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I'm back, y'all, with #36 in our perpetual series of mammals lists: hedgehogs! Also gymnures, collectively making up the family Erinaceidae. This kicks off the four families of the order Eulipotyphla, and I've started with a small one at only 24 species. These guys are pretty cute, and more importantly were fairly easy to source. As always, this list follows the pattern of the previous lists and reflects previous FLC comments. Thanks for reviewing! --Pres N 16:14, 16 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comments edit

"Erinaceidae is an family" => "Erinaceidae is a family"
"A member of this family is [....] and include" - doesn't seem to be grammatically correct
Wikilink arthropod? Slightly obscure term.....
That's it! -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 16:31, 16 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- @ChrisTheDude: Done, thanks! --Pres N 19:45, 16 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 20:15, 17 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Dylan620 edit

I love hedgehogs and this looks like it will be a fun image review :D saving this space – should have something more substantial here in the next couple days! Dylan620 (he/him • talk • edits) 22:48, 16 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Following up as promised:

I'm a little concerned that File:Erinaceus amurensis.jpg lacks authorship information, and the source URL is a dead link. I was able to find archived versions of the site, but I can't figure out where the image would be. I did find a potential alternative on Commons, but the little critter's face isn't clearly visible because it's pointed down away from the camera – could that still be workable?

Swapped- I agree, the lack of author information or direct link seems suspect

Not a dealbreaker but I think A. albiventris and A. algirus could be represented by higher-resolution images. I found an excellent A. albiventris photo on Commons. There's also this A. algirus photo that I just cropped from a larger upload (although I do love the belly-up pose in the current photo).

Swapped both

Alt text looks good across the board.
With the exception of the aforementioned E. amurensis photo, licensing and authorship check out for every image used.

Dylan620 (he/him • talk • edits) 22:53, 18 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Dylan620: Swapped all, thanks for reviewing! --Pres N 01:09, 19 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

No prob – looks good to me! My only remaining comment is that the E. roumanicus range looks more like it's in blue than gray, though I'm wondering if that's just a matter of perception. Dylan620 (he/him • talk • edits) 12:58, 19 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Dylan620: Changed to blue- that's actually what it says in the article, it just looks more gray to me on my screen? It's blueish gray, either works. --Pres N 13:20, 19 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Support. Dylan620 (he/him • talk • edits) 13:25, 19 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

AK

Reminding me of the fact that I have not done any bird lists in a while.
"A member of this family [...] includes" is still ungrammatical.

Fixed again

Conversion error on the 1 cm tail multiple times throughout the article.

I'm not sure on this- "1–3 cm (0–1 in)" is a little odd, but 1 cm is almost 0 in. The tails are between 0 and 1 in, just not actually 0. Do you have a suggestion?

Why isn't the 2023 study splitting H. suillus into 6 spp included? Also, you've missed linking the article for the nominate ssp in the list.

This list (and all of them) follow the WP:MAMMAL standard of "use MSW3's taxonomy, unless both the IUCN and the ASM agree on a change". The IUCN, however, is much more conservative about changes than the ASM- just because a paper is published with a taxonomy revision doesn't mean that it follows it (yet). Unfortunately, wikipedia editors often split up articles based on individual papers instead of following that guideline, so it doesn't always align. Linked the Javan ssp, though.

Bornean short-tailed gymnure has an image of a live specimen, see that article.

Image updated.

Yeah, that's all I got. AryKun (talk) 06:25, 18 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Replied inline. --Pres N 15:19, 18 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
You could increase the number of sigfigs in the convert template and see if it helps? AryKun (talk) 17:11, 18 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@AryKun: Done; not 100% on it, but it does solve the "0 in" issue. Thanks for reviewing! --Pres N 17:26, 18 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support on the basis of prose from me. AryKun (talk) 18:00, 18 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment from ZooBlazer edit

The article looks great overall, so I have little to say besides that the IUCN red list link for File:Atelerix albiventris range map.png gives a "page cannot be found". -- Zoo Blazer 07:19, 29 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@ZooBlazer: updated, thanks! --Pres N 12:55, 29 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

In that case, happy to support. -- Zoo Blazer 15:15, 29 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Support from Hurricanehink edit

I came here from my own nature-themed FLC, so figured, why not review a list about some cute little critters?

So some random spotchecking and bits:

Erinaceidae is one of four families in the order Eulipotyphla.

This does not appear to be sourced.

Added

Should "order" be linked? You linked family and genus (genera).

Done

"The twenty-four extant species" - any reason you spell it out? Generally, numbers above ten are spelled as numbers. I take it because you also have two, five, eight, and give, correct?

Yeah, it's just to match the rest of the sentence.

Ref 1 appears to be down

It's frequently down for some reason, but it's not dead

Should conventions be beneath Classification? Or am I just reading things out of order? The Convention seems to be describing what's in the table, right?

The pattern for these lists is Conventions then Classification, because if there's any extinct species/subspecies (after 1500) Conventions explains the dagger symbol and that 1500CE cutoff; there aren't any for this family, but I'd like to keep the pattern across the lists.

Is there any way to make it a bit more apparent that the E. europaeus map is focused on Europe and New Zealand? Like, is there any reason it includes the western hemisphere?

Will crop down to exclude the empty Americas; I've requested autopatrol rights on commons as right now I can't update an image I didn't upload.

Obligatory complaint that there aren't pictures for every species, but I'm assuming you've tried finding a free version of them?

Yep, I do my best, but getting free images for east/southeast asian species is frequently challenging.

All in all, it's a good read, and is informative. I was nitpicky about sourcing and such, so I hope my comments aren't too difficult to address. Kudos to your work, @PresN:. ♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 23:19, 4 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Hurricanehink: replied inline, thanks for reviewing! --Pres N 16:01, 5 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. I had a feeling those would be your responses for a few of them. Since the picture being cropped is a fairly minimal thing, I'm happy to support now. Thanks for making sure we have high-quality science lists. ♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 16:07, 5 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Since I'm currently the only active FLC closer, doing an IAR close of my own nomination as promoted. --Pres N 16:30, 11 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Closing note: This candidate has been promoted, but there may be a delay in bot processing of the close. Please see WP:FLC/ar, and leave the {{featured list candidates}} template in place on the talk page until the bot goes through.

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.