Talk:Little blue heron

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Little blue heron. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070219101826/http://www.enature.com/fieldguides/detail.asp?recnum=BD0111 to http://www.enature.com/fieldguides/detail.asp?recnum=BD0111

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 00:14, 4 January 2018 (UTC)

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Little blue heron/GA2. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Amitchell125 (talk · contribs) 16:53, 21 December 2022 (UTC)

Happy to review the article.

Review comments

Lead section / infobox

• Brazil (in the infobox) doesn’t need to be linked. Similarly, in the lead section, unlink Americas, United States; South America; eggs; fish; animals (see MOS:OL).

   Fixed

• Consider amending salt to ‘salt water’.

   Done

• Improve the prose by amending on young to ‘on young birds’.

   Done

• The map key needs to have orange added.

   Done

• Link Linnaeus; range (Species distribution).

  Linnaeus is linked in both the infobox and body. I did the second.

1 Etymology

• Can the text from this section (there is very little) be put elsewhere, perhaps even in a note?

   Done

• Unlink English; Spanish (common terms).

   Done

2 Taxonomy

• Unlink all countries and continents here and throughout the article (see MOS:OL).

   Done

• Spelling variants – I’m unclear why this term is used, as the words are not differently spelt. Amend to ‘Variations of the name’?

   Done

2.1 Hybrids

• This small subsection doesn’t need its own title.

   Fixed

3 Description

• Consider linking coloration (Animal coloration).

   Done

• Link primaries (Flight_feather#Primaries).

   Done

• Little blue herons are relatively small. Is this needed? The dimensions are provided later on the in the section.

   Removed

• Dusky – can a better description be used (e.g. ‘somewhat dark in color’)?

   Done

• In addition to the aforementioned changes to the color of the head – is redundant text, and should be edited out.

   Done

• Be consistent when linking colours (e.g. turquoise is linked but not maroon).

  Links for both, as it seems plausible enough that a reader would find them useful.

4 Distribution and habitat

• Link vagrant (Vagrancy (biology)); range (Species distribution).

   Done

5 Behavior and ecology

• Unlink fish.

   Done

• I would add a comma after when hunting.

   Done

• It sometimes - ‘They sometimes’? (for the sake of consistency)

   Done

5.1.1 Mating

• See MOS:PARA for why I am saying this subsection is too short to have a title.

   Removed

5.1.2 Nesting

• Link incubate (Egg incubation).

   Done

• They typically – it’s a Wikipedia thing, but ‘Little blue herons typically’ is preferred here.

   Done

• colonial nester – the term could be briefly explained here to help readers who might be unfamiliar with it.
•  Done
• I would combine the short paragraph that begins Clutch sizes .... with the one above it.

   Done

5.2 Predation

• the birds fled – it needs to be clearer which birds are being referred to here.

   Fixed

• There is an unaddressed GA1 comment - “Why aren't parasites and predation under the 'threats' section?” that needs to be sorted. I think the text is better off being moved to Threats.

  That was deliberately left unaddressed, as the article only describes recorded parasites and does not state that they are harming little blue heron populations. I would like to avoid WP:SYNTH.

5.3 Parasites

• helminths (parasitic worms) – why not remove helminths and simply link parasitic worms?

   Done

• Improve the prose by amending examined little blue herons in South Florida to ‘little blue herons, examined in South Florida’

   Done except the comma, as I think it would read a little better without it.

• I would add a comma after Posthodiplostomum macrocotyle.

   Done

• I would consider combining this paragraph with the one above it, and renaming the title.

  I understand your point and agree that it would look better overall, but I don't see any justification for doing so, as the two subjects are very different.

5.4 Prey

• Link mangrove forest.

  Used earlier so I linked there instead.

• they primarily – ‘little blue herons primarily’.

   Done

6 Conservation

• The video clip would be imo better on the right (the head is then pointing inwards, and the image does not interfere with the titles in the text (MOS:IMAGELOC).

   Done

• (IUCN) – there is no need for this abbreviation to be included, as it does not reappear in the text.

   Removed

6.1 Threats and 6.1.1 Competition

• These single paragraph subsections do not need titles.

   Removed

7 Bibliography

• This section should be positioned below the References section, not above it.

   Fixed

• As the sources are not cited in the text, they should either not appear in the article, or the section should be named Further reading .

   Done

• Not GA, so not vital for this review, but the sources in this section are not formatted consistently, something that many editors would expect in a GA.

  I didn't add this section, so I have no idea where these books came from (I'm having a hard time finding some). I could just remove them if you think it's for the best.

Yes, I would remove them, they seem very general in nature, and probably won't much to the article. Amitchell125 (talk) 20:51, 27 December 2022 (UTC)

On hold

I'm putting the article on hold for a week until 4 January to allow time for the issues raised to be addressed. Regards, Amitchell125 (talk) 09:45, 27 December 2022 (UTC)

Amitchell125, I have done as you suggested for nearly all of these. An anonymous username, not my real name 19:36, 27 December 2022 (UTC)

Passing

That was fast! Everything seems fine now, excepting the sources to be removed, which I'll leave you to do in your own time. Passing now, thanks for producing a highly informative article. Amitchell125 (talk) 20:54, 27 December 2022 (UTC)