Talk:Clouded leopard/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: William Harris (talk · contribs) 20:53, 19 December 2020 (UTC)

Hello BhagyaMani, it is outside of my usual scope, however I shall be delighted to commence this review. Discussion will take place below the following assessment table. William Harris (talk) 20:53, 19 December 2020 (UTC)

Assessment

Rate	Attribute	Review Comment
1. Well-written:
	1a. the prose is clear, concise, and understandable to an appropriately broad audience; spelling and grammar are correct.	Done
	1b. it complies with the Manual of Style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation.	Done
2. Verifiable with no original research:
	2a. it contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline.	Done
	2b. reliable sources are cited inline. All content that could reasonably be challenged, except for plot summaries and that which summarizes cited content elsewhere in the article, must be cited no later than the end of the paragraph (or line if the content is not in prose).	Done
	2c. it contains no original research.	Done
	2d. it contains no copyright violations or plagiarism.	Done Earwig's Copyvio Detector indicates that there exists a 98.4% match with www.gbif.org which gives its source as Wikipedia. There is a 37.7% match with www.international.ase.ro which appears to be a part-mirroring site. There is a 25.9% match with a journal article on www.cats.org but with an assessment of "violation unlikely". Dab Solver indicates no disambiguation links in this article. Checklinks indicates all links are good.
3. Broad in its coverage:
	3a. it addresses the main aspects of the topic.	Done Broadly includes the material recommended by the article structure of WP:CATS.
	3b. it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style).	Done
	4. Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each.	Done
	5. Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute.	Done
6. Illustrated, if possible, by media such as images, video, or audio:
	6a. media are tagged with their copyright statuses, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content.	Done
	6b. media are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions.	Done
	7. Overall assessment.	Meets the requirements of a Good Article. William Harris (talk) 11:53, 20 December 2020 (UTC)

Discussion

Regarding the sentence: "The clouded leopard from mainland Asia reached Borneo and Sumatra via a now submerged land bridge several million years ago." I am finding it difficult to find mention of "several million years ago" in the sourced article and perhaps that timeline could simply be removed from the sentence. (Lower sea levels occur as a result of glaciations, the last one being a mere 20,000 years ago, so we are not sure how long ago.)

I checked the source : Kitchener et al. (2006) indeed did not refer to any time scale. But Buckley-Beason et al. (2006) referred to the land bridge and estimated that isolation of mainland and insular pops occurred during the Pleistocene. So changed this. -- BhagyaMani (talk) 10:43, 20 December 2020 (UTC)

Possibly worth linking the first mention of Felidae in the text, in addition to links for "Singapore, Taiwan, and possibly Hainan Island".

Felidae is linked to in the very first sentence, but admittedly : hidden under the word 'cat'. -- BhagyaMani (talk) 10:46, 20 December 2020 (UTC)

The Nongkhyllem National Park is redlinked; that may be intentional. William Harris (talk) 21:36, 19 December 2020 (UTC)

Yes it is. Though this NP is rather small, but worthwhile to create this page, once some more info is available. -- BhagyaMani (talk) 10:43, 20 December 2020 (UTC)

All good by me; congratulations. William Harris (talk) 11:53, 20 December 2020 (UTC)