Talk:A History of British Birds (Yarrell book)/GA1

GA Review

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

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

Reviewer: Spinningspark (talk · contribs) 08:38, 26 April 2013 (UTC)

I'm looking at this one. SpinningSpark 08:38, 26 April 2013 (UTC)

That's very good of you - books seem less popular with reviewers than beasts. Chiswick Chap (talk) 09:11, 26 April 2013 (UTC)

Couple of concerns and some minor stuff, but overall, a likeable article.

thanks! Think I've addressed them all below now. Chiswick Chap (talk) 20:31, 26 April 2013 (UTC)

Lede

• "lively style". Style is not really addressed as such in the article, at least not in a way that pointed to a specific reference.

removed.

• "Linnaeus, Temminck and Thomas Pennant". Is there some reason for only stating Pennant's first name? Fine to drop first names after first mention (or not mention at all) but this is the first mention of all three. There are also other instances of this inconsistency later in the article.

just habit with the famous fellows. Have added first names.

• "octavo, Royal octavo, imperial octavo". These are not well-known sizes nowadays and need a wikilink or gloss.

done both.

Approach

• It is stated this work is significantly different from Bewick but does not go on to say what the differences are, which I would have thought it should do, at least in summary. The whole paragraph is just left hanging. Also, as something of significance, it should be covered in the lede.

Ah, it's the introductory sentence for the 3 subsections of Approach. Have added a connecting sentence to lead into the material, and mentioned the increased scientific accuracy in the lead.

Correspondence

• Why is "Lapland" in scare quotes? Is this as quoted by the author, or do you just not know what he means?

removed.

• "Yarrell himself for Germany, Holland, France and Italy (no source being named)". Not sure I understand this. What does "no source being named" mean? If you have concluded that Yarrell made the observations himself merely because he does not state a source, then that would be OR synthesis.

removed; replaced with direct (first person) quote from Yarrell, with page ref.

Observations

• "Writing in almost Darwinian style". There is an implication here of the authors beliefs that requires a source.

removed.

Images

• All illustrations are taken from the book. That's fine, but some other material to break it up would be good. There is at least a likeness of the author available.

added portrait of Yarrell.

Editions

• It was mentioned earlier that the fourth edition was rewritten, and here it says it was four volumes instead of three implying something major. Some description of what had changed is needed, at least in brief.

Added a sentence on the changes for the 4th edition, wikilinked its authors.

See also

^MacGillivray is already linked twice in the article so does not really need to be here as well. Also, sister projects do not go in see also according to WP:LAYOUT , making the whole section redundant.

unlinked MacG, and removed the now-empty See also.

References

• fn#6 does not give a page number

p. 63 added.

• SpinningSpark 19:20, 26 April 2013 (UTC)

• Promoting and archiving discussion. SpinningSpark 23:11, 26 April 2013 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.