Talk:Laysan honeycreeper
This article is a current featured article candidate. A featured article should exemplify Wikipedia's best work, and is therefore expected to meet the criteria. Please feel free to After one of the FAC coordinators promotes the article or archives the nomination, a bot will update the nomination page and article talk page. Do not manually update the {{Article history}} template when the FAC closes. |
Laysan honeycreeper has been listed as one of the Natural sciences good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it. Review: June 5, 2024. (Reviewed version). |
This article is rated GA-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
GA Review[edit]
GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
- This review is transcluded from Talk:Laysan honeycreeper/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.
Nominator: FunkMonk (talk · contribs) 14:47, 16 May 2024 (UTC)
Reviewer: Esculenta (talk · contribs) 16:53, 23 May 2024 (UTC)
Hi FunkMonk, I'll do this review. Will take a few days. Also, let me know if this is heading to FAC and, if you'd like, I could be extra nitpicky. Esculenta (talk) 16:53, 23 May 2024 (UTC)
- Thanks, yeah, FAC is the plan, so be as nitpicky as possible. Note I haven't done alt text yet, because I'll handle that inconvenience when I hit FAC... FunkMonk (talk) 19:27, 23 May 2024 (UTC)
Here's my review. The article is nicely researched, written, and illustrated; looks like you've done this before! Since there isn't much to be criticized with the article, I got very nitpicky in the commentary below, but feel free to push back on my suggestions. Haven't looked for other sources, or performed spot-checks (will do on next visit). Esculenta (talk) 02:02, 28 May 2024 (UTC)
- Nice, that'll sure be helpful when the time comes. It's a lot, so I'll fix it drip wise. FunkMonk (talk) 21:14, 28 May 2024 (UTC)
- I believe everything has been addressed now, Esculenta. FunkMonk (talk) 18:51, 1 June 2024 (UTC)
- And new comments are now addressed, Esculenta. FunkMonk (talk) 00:54, 5 June 2024 (UTC)
- Alright, I think that's about all of the nits I have to pick in this article. I checked for extra sources, but didn't find anything more than passing mentions of the subject; it seems you've used all of the major ones I can see. Passing this as good article now. Esculenta (talk) 03:27, 5 June 2024 (UTC)
- And new comments are now addressed, Esculenta. FunkMonk (talk) 00:54, 5 June 2024 (UTC)
- I believe everything has been addressed now, Esculenta. FunkMonk (talk) 18:51, 1 June 2024 (UTC)
Lead
- "The bird was first noticed in 1828, and received its scientific name by Walter Rothschild in 1892, and was placed in the genus Himatione along with the ʻapapane." construction slightly awkward, suggest "… noticed in 1828, received its scientific name from Walter…"
- " but was misspelled, and Rothschild attempted" suggest sentence break -> " but was misspelled. Rothschild later attempted"
- I think the fact that Laysan is a coral island is notable/interesting enough to be mentioned in the lead
- Added "Laysan is a remote coral island". FunkMonk (talk) 21:14, 28 May 2024 (UTC)
- "The specific name, fraithii, refers to George D. Freeth," leaves me wondering who Freeth is
- "a grouping within Carduelinae," suggest "a grouping within the finch subfamily Carduelinae,"
- possibly useful links (this suggested list for entire article, not just lead): covert feather, iris, song, breeding season, introduced, naturalist, modifier, loan-words (also, confirm hyphenation), common name, nest, egg, sex ratio, coral island, clade, plumage, lineage, divergence, breeding season, substratum, topography, flora, down (from "brown down"), clutch
- All added now. I suspect some of these, like nest and egg, will be considered WP:overlinking at FAC. Coral island was already linked both in the intro and article body. While doing this, I noticed "eggs" redirected to "eggs as food". I just redirected it to "egg", but I could imagine there might be pushback. Why should the plural of such an important biological concept be reduced to human food? That certainly can't be the main subject. FunkMonk (talk) 22:23, 30 May 2024 (UTC)
- "This bird was very active, and while less confiding than other birds," I had to search the internet to unconfuse myself and realize that "wikt:confiding" has a birdwatching-specific meaning here; perhaps meaning that should be integrated into the text somehow.
- Seems to not have a very different meaning than in general use? I think it's already explained by "they were reported to sometimes enter buildings to hunt moths and for roosting at night", not sure how else it could be elaborated on from the sources. FunkMonk (talk) 22:23, 30 May 2024 (UTC)
- Random internet definition of confiding (which I think would align with most people's definition of the word): "willing to tell someone about a secret or private matter and trust them not to repeat it to others". Specific bird-watching definition: "referring to a bird that is not shy around humans and allows people to approach closely without flying away." I think the specific use is far enough away from the general use that, at least for the first time the word is used, a more readily accessible phrasing could be beneficial (e.g. "This bird was very active and, while less trusting of humans than other birds,"). Esculenta (talk) 05:14, 4 June 2024 (UTC)
- Seems to not have a very different meaning than in general use? I think it's already explained by "they were reported to sometimes enter buildings to hunt moths and for roosting at night", not sure how else it could be elaborated on from the sources. FunkMonk (talk) 22:23, 30 May 2024 (UTC)
- "it sometimes entered buildings for moths" meaning slightly ambiguous … to hunt moths? … because moths coerced them?
- the precision of the length of the "typical" egg looks quite specific, and the first converted measurement has more implied accuracy than the input number (similar issue with the wing measurement above)
- Some of these are because older sources often use imperial units, so in these cases I had to add the "order" parameter, and that means the "second" number was sometimes more precise. But I might have fixed some of that now? I'm not really great with numbers and their templates. FunkMonk (talk) 22:23, 30 May 2024 (UTC)
- "extinction of 3 out of 5" numbers under ten should written out per MOS:NUMERAL
- typically the synonymy list includes the authorities and years of publication, and it should include a citation in the "synonyms_ref" parameter
- throughout the article, I notice the middle initial(s) of people are always given, and I question the value of this practice. Is there that much added value (disambiguatory or otherwise), e.g., in knowing Hugo Schauinsland's middle initial is "H"?
- Well, it can be crucial for linking to the right articles if there are multiple persons with the same name. And if a person doesn't have an article and might get one in the future, it will be easier to track articles down where they could be linked to like this one, so I think it does more good than not. FunkMonk (talk) 21:13, 29 May 2024 (UTC)
- I disagree, and thought about analysing each specific instance in the article to convince you that's it's unnecessary, but decided nah... I'll just leave you with this thought: imagine having a conversation with someone and every time they mention a person, they give their first name and middle initial. Wouldn't that sound somewhat ... unusual? Esculenta (talk) 05:14, 4 June 2024 (UTC)
- Well, it can be crucial for linking to the right articles if there are multiple persons with the same name. And if a person doesn't have an article and might get one in the future, it will be easier to track articles down where they could be linked to like this one, so I think it does more good than not. FunkMonk (talk) 21:13, 29 May 2024 (UTC)
Taxonomy
- suggest non-breaking spaces in short-form binomial names to avoid unsightly line breaks (in image caption too)
- "manager of the guano-mining there," feels like it's missing a word, maybe "manager of the guano-mining operations there,"
- ", and restricted Himatione to the red species; the ʻapapane and the Laysan honeycreeper." semicolon doesn't work here
- what year did Hartert consider the bird a subspecies of ʻapapane"?
- it appears that "Native Hawaiians" should be capitalized, based on the linked article
- maybe also give the location of the museums that are mentioned, for prose confirmation of specimens found "in various museums across the world"
- "Schauinsland considered the Laysan honeycreeper an example of how a new species may arise through isolation in 1899." Placement of year at end makes the sentence construction somewhat awkward. Also, I'm wondering if it's worthwhile to mention that this is know known as allopatric speciation?
- the three extinct Laysan birds image needs to explain in the caption which are which
- Phylogenetic Species Concept per the link, this does not need to be capitalized
- "(formerly spelled Drepanidae or Drepaniidae, which turned out to be preoccupied by a family of moths[16])" could be confusing to non-taxonomists, perhaps a bit more context like "(formerly spelled Drepanidae or Drepaniidae, a name which turned out to be nomenclaturally unavailable as it was preoccupied by a family of moths[16])", and link available name
- italicize Palmeria
- "and it was also considered a subspecies of the ʻapapane for most of this time, H. sanguinea freethii." suggest slight ordering tweak "and it was also considered a subspecies of the ʻapapane, H. sanguinea freethii, for most of this time."
- "From 1893–1900, Rothschild published a three-part monograph" suggest "From 1893 to 1900" Why? When phrase is introduced with "from", reader expects "to", possible creating a slight cognitive dissonance as readers may briefly pause to interpret the symbol, and in formal writing words are often preferred over symbols for clarity and flow.
- ""They speculated that if this bird could survive on Laysan, there could also have been a niche for a relative on the island of Nihoa." suggest "They speculated that if this bird could survive on Laysan, there could also be a niche for a relative on the island of Nihoa." or "They speculated that if this bird could have survived on Laysan, there might also have been a niche for a relative on the island of Nihoa." (verb tenses should stay consistent)
- Took your first suggestion. Also linked ecological niche. FunkMonk (talk) 16:43, 1 June 2024 (UTC)
- "The German superintendent of the guano operation, Max Schlemmer, introduced domestic rabbits, European hares, and guinea pigs to the island in 1903 to start a meat-canning business that would provide food for guano miners, but also to amuse his children." suggest "… guano miners and to amuse his children." the original use of "but" implies a contrast between the two purposes. However, there's no inherent contrast between providing food for miners and amusing his children; both can coexist without implying contradiction.
Description
- "breeding-season" or "breeding season"?
Habitat
- "an area of 1.4 square miles, and the honeycreeper lived" suggest sentence break here.
- "The island is roughly triangular" really? I don't see it; to me, it looks so "roughly" triangular as to be quadrilateral!
- "This bird was very active, and while less confiding than other birds, it sometimes entered buildings for moths and for roosting at night." suggest tweak of punctuation placement: "This bird was very active and, while less confiding than other birds, sometimes entered buildings for moths and for roosting at night."
- "rises into up to 12 m (40 ft) high crest elevations" needs adj=on in convert template
- "about one fifth of the island's center" needs hyphenation
- "handnet"; "rain water"; "sea bird"? one word or two? sometimes the format of the linked article contradicts the format used in this article
- "its bowl measured about 5.7 cm (2.25 in) across and 4.13 cm (1.625 in) in depth." there's something jarring with first saying "about" (which makes the reader anticipate approximation), and then giving such precise measurements. Note again, the precision inexplicably grows with the unit conversion (ditto egg measurements later).
- "While the Laysan rail probably did not survive on the island for long after the storm, it had been introduced to Midway Atoll, but went extinct there too by 1945 because rats were introduced accidentally during US military construction." Is the implication that the rats killed the bird? Any more details on this (do rats kill birds directly, or steal eggs?)
Behavior and ecology
- "The Laysan honeycreeper was nectarivorous and insectivorous, and unlike the ʻapapane,
italso foraged on the ground."
- "The bird does not seem to have been abundant when discovered, and was" suggest "The bird did not seem to be abundant when discovered and was"
References
- FN4: translated title would be nice
- probably best if ISBN hyphenation is consistent throughout
- FN10: needs pp. & endash
- FN18: maybe a bit unusual to "et al." after a single author, considering other pubs get two authors listed
- FN19: could use publication (or last update) date
- FN25: they'll want a more specific page range or number at FAC
- FN26: could put doi-free as parameter to let readers know they can access that source (or link the PDF)
- FN32: the doi link says it's issue 85
- a DEFAULTSORT template is unnecessary "if the article or page should be alphabetized according to its title (which is true for most articles)"
Images
- all images and media have Wikipedia-compatible licenses
Comments, round 2[edit]
- I made some copyedits, please check
- sfn #2 needs accessdate
- comment: "Her "clade 11" is depicted in the phylogram below" I think "cladogram" is the more correct term here, as the diagram doesn't show evolutionary distances (via varying branch lengths) that are associated with a phylogram, and instead shows the only the order of evolutionary branching.
Spot checks:
- sfn#3: both spotchecks difficult: I'm not sure what exactly the citation is supporting, as all citations are given in a cluster at the end of paragraph. Same thing with its next use. A meaty paragraph with many facts has three citations at the end. What is supporting what? Obviously, the sentence ending with the statement "though the extent of the vegetation had almost recovered by 1973." isn't being supported by the source published in 1963, but that's what's implied from the citation placement. Are these "broad citations" allowed at FAC? Ok, so I have some concern about this citation style, but I'll try some spotchecks on singly cited (=more easily verifiable) sentences:
- I've made the range of the 1963 source more specific, it was mainly used for some info about the Moller expedition and the geology of the island. I haven't had problems with such citation clusters at FAC, the reason for them is that the paragraphs they support are stitched together from different sources that each give different details about the same things, but each of them leave out details that the others have, so it's not really possibly to remove any of the. FunkMonk (talk) 00:54, 5 June 2024 (UTC)
- "In 2011, the American ornithologist Peter Pyle pointed out that Rothschild…" sourced to sfn11: fine
- "It was the only nectar-feeding finch of the northwestern Hawaiian Islands." sourced to sfn#2: Cannot verify statement (e.g., can't see word "nectar" on page)
- "The Laysan honeycreeper gathered insects from flowers, such as small, green caterpillars, and were fond of the large, brownish moths called millers (including species of Agrotis and others now thought extinct[39])" sourced to sfn#39: partially verified; I didn't see any mention of small green caterpillars, and the source doesn't say that the insects are "extinct", rather, it refers to their "apparent disappearance". Also, it might be better to link directly to the correct page 22, as there are three page "22s" in this document
- Citation 39 only supports the part inside the parenthesis where it's located, the rest of the sentence is supported by the sources by the end of it, including the green caterpillars (both Fisher sources). I've been told at FAC before that this was the way to source a part in a sentence that would otherwise be hard to connect with the citation if placed at the end of the sentence. As for the moths, I've just said "that have since disappeared" instead, to be closer to the source, but it's implied they're extinct, as the "survival" of others is mentioned right after. FunkMonk (talk) 00:54, 5 June 2024 (UTC)
- "The sex ratio between adult specimens in museum collections is 1.7:1." sourced to sfn22: fine
- "Fisher collected a nest with an egg in mid-may, while the American zoologist William A. Bryan collected an egg on May 10. The American ornithologist Alfred M. Bailey, who visited Laysan in 1912, stated that the clutch size was four or five eggs, while sets of three were taken by various collectors." sourced to sfn20: fine
- "In 1915, the American First Lieutenant William H. Munter reported that the Laysan honeycreeper was fairly common, and that they were judged to number a 1000." sourced to sfn42: fine
- Dickey's last field notes quote is cited to two sources, but why? And which page of the 210 available in sfn#36 might one verify this quote?
- Citation 27 is just a secondary source that cites that quote, I thought it would be better than just using the primary source itself, to show others have picked that part out, as well as identifying it as coming from Dickey, which is difficult to decipher from the raw field notes. I've specified the pages of citation 36 further. FunkMonk (talk) 00:54, 5 June 2024 (UTC)
- more specific page # (s) for sfn#28 and sfn#36 please
- note that "Per G.P." in sfn#29 doesn't get initials spaced, unlike the rest
- in sfn#22, "Fancy, Steven G.; C. John Ralph" the second author formatting differs from others
- Seems to have been an existing citation, and ugh, exactly why I used to only include initials for first names before. This is one of those cases where the author is only ever listed as " C. John Ralph", and I have no idea how to find his full name to make it consistent. I've fixed the citation template itself so that the names are in correct order, though. FunkMonk (talk) 20:58, 4 June 2024 (UTC)
- Wikipedia featured article candidates
- Wikipedia good articles
- Natural sciences good articles
- GA-Class bird articles
- Low-importance bird articles
- WikiProject Birds articles
- GA-Class Extinction articles
- Low-importance Extinction articles
- WikiProject Extinction articles
- GA-Class Hawaii articles
- Mid-importance Hawaii articles
- WikiProject Hawaii articles