Talk:Adenanthos obovatus/GA1
Latest comment: 13 years ago by J Milburn in topic GA Review
GA Review edit
GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch
Reviewer: J Milburn (talk) 18:25, 17 December 2010 (UTC)
GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria
- Is it reasonably well written?
- Is it factually accurate and verifiable?
- A. References to sources:
- B. Citation of reliable sources where necessary:
- C. No original research:
- A. References to sources:
- Is it broad in its coverage?
- A. Major aspects:
- B. Focused:
- A. Major aspects:
- Is it neutral?
- Fair representation without bias:
- Fair representation without bias:
- Is it stable?
- No edit wars, etc:
- No edit wars, etc:
- Does it contain images to illustrate the topic?
- A. Images are copyright tagged, and non-free images have fair use rationales:
- B. Images are provided where possible and appropriate, with suitable captions:
- A. Images are copyright tagged, and non-free images have fair use rationales:
- Overall:
- Pass or Fail:
- Pass or Fail:
- "The plant was collected and described" I appreciate it's not the first collection, but perhaps you could specify in the lead why this is significant?
- Could the lead perhaps be expanded a little?
- "taxonomy" would go before description in my eyes, but I don't know if there's actually a guideline on that somewhere?
- This is one of those cases where there are converging layouts. Pushing for taxonomy to go above description was mainly my idea (generally so that the description section (which is often where one wants to put photos) is then down below where the taxobox ends), and I did it in lots of bird, plant and fungus articles. Hesperian initiated most of the proteaceae articles (banksia and now adenanthos) and I have followed his lead in these. We've got some action across all bio articles in streamlining articles but has been challenging as there are so many...there are no strict guidelines as such.) Casliber (talk · contribs) 20:38, 17 December 2010 (UTC)
- "sessile" Link?
- "perianth" Link?
- "obovata" So this is a synonym? Perhaps note it in the taxobox?
- "who he" whom? I may be wrong.
- sterile is a dablink
- this is tricky - the first definition on hte target page is fleshed out, followed by some other links. I need to read more to see which it might pertain to, as many of the target pages seem a bit narrow. The whole set of pages there might be in need of an overhaul. I am tempted to delink for the time being as "sterile" is a common enough word until we have a proper target to link to. Casliber (talk · contribs) 22:43, 17 December 2010 (UTC)
- I created a new stub on sterility (physiology), defined as the inability to effect sexual reproduction in an organism or organ otherwise anatomically equipped to do so. I'm shocked we didn't already have a page on this. As Cas says, the whole set of pages there is in need of an overhaul. Hesperian 12:16, 18 December 2010 (UTC)
- this is tricky - the first definition on hte target page is fleshed out, followed by some other links. I need to read more to see which it might pertain to, as many of the target pages seem a bit narrow. The whole set of pages there might be in need of an overhaul. I am tempted to delink for the time being as "sterile" is a common enough word until we have a proper target to link to. Casliber (talk · contribs) 22:43, 17 December 2010 (UTC)
- "published Adenanthos intermedia" Is that a recognised use of the word "published"? I read that as "published a work called...", rather than "described a species called..."
- "A. intermedius" is another synonym that could go in the taxobox?
- I think mention of the common names belongs in the lead- a lot of people will know it first and formost from common names (I assume).
- "abuts" is not a word I've heard before. The OED does have abut, but it lists the main meaning as obsolete.
- "The Silvereye (Zosterops lateralis) also drinks" repetition of "also"
- "Too heavy for the fine branches, their bills are too large for the tubes as well." Implies that it is the bills which are too heavy
- "Propagation is by cuttings of the current season's growth, from which it strikes readily[6] and makes fairly quick growth." I get what you're saying, but does that make sense?
- "It prefers a sunny aspect" Repetition of "prefers"
- There are slightly too short paragraphs throughout the article, but they're worst in the cultivation section. Any chance of them being merged?
- Cites 1 and 5 refer to the same person in different ways, and perhaps both should link to our article on him, as cite 11 does?
Thanks for the work you've done in response to this review- the article's looking that little bit tidier now. I'm passing it- well done! J Milburn (talk) 16:33, 18 December 2010 (UTC)