Talk:Marine mammal/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Chiswick Chap (talk · contribs) 07:48, 6 September 2016 (UTC)

I'll take on this one. Chiswick Chap (talk) 07:48, 6 September 2016 (UTC)

General comments

This is a well-written, well-cited and thorough article on a broad topic. As such, most comments will be minor, or suggestions. Chiswick Chap (talk) 07:52, 6 September 2016 (UTC)

On the referencing, all the refs are simple except for refs [38] and [118], which use subsidiary page numbering in the text. This jars somewhat (and looks very academic). It might be better to list these reused refs as "Sources" and to use a Harvard style link to automate those discreetly. Alternatively, ref [118] could be replaced with a single page range, and ref [38] with separately numbered full citations. Chiswick Chap (talk) 08:28, 6 September 2016 (UTC)

Specific comments

Lead

• "distinct taxon or systematic grouping" - near-synonyms. Perhaps better to say "paraphyletic".

is it better now?   User:Dunkleosteus77 |push to talk  18:26, 6 September 2016 (UTC)

• "their roles in various ecosystems .. play important roles .. This role.." Could be less repetitively worded.

fixed   User:Dunkleosteus77 |push to talk  18:26, 6 September 2016 (UTC)

• "of Steller's sea cow and the Caribbean monk seal." Are we using "the" for species, or not?

"Steller" is the name of a person, so an article does not need to precede it. If you still want the "the" there, I'll do it   User:Dunkleosteus77 |push to talk  18:26, 6 September 2016 (UTC)

I'd say yes, at least in British English, but if that's US English then fine.

• "ongoing effects of global warming degrades" should be "degrade".

in that passage, "global warming" is the noun, not "effects" which is basically an adjective in this case. If you still want "degrade" I'll do it  User:Dunkleosteus77 |push to talk  18:26, 6 September 2016 (UTC)

I read it again and it still seems to mean that "the effects (pl) ... degrade (3rd person pl)", so I fixed it.

Taxonomy

• As in lead, "distinct taxon or systematic grouping" need fixing.

is it better now?  User:Dunkleosteus77 |push to talk  18:26, 6 September 2016 (UTC)

I don't see the need to say it twice, but if you think the near synonyms are necessary that's up to you.

• Would suggest a small cladogram to indicate paraphyletic grouping - all that's needed is an outline showing Placentalia with superorders and example orders, e.g. Paenungulata contains Proboscidea (elephants) and Sirenia (dugongs, etc). This would show the 3 orders of living marine mammals scattered in the evolutionary tree of placental mammals. Could have small images alongside each included marine and terrestrial order to make the point.

I'll get to that later  User:Dunkleosteus77 |push to talk  18:26, 6 September 2016 (UTC)

added   User:Dunkleosteus77 |push to talk  00:54, 7 September 2016 (UTC)

Thanks! Images are optional but would be really nice, as in Mammals.

• It would be nice to add Mysticeti and Odontoceti to the cladogram, given that you've subdivided the pinnipeds already.

added   User:Dunkleosteus77 |push to talk  22:34, 8 September 2016 (UTC)

Classification

• Can a list be a main article for classification? It doesn't discuss the topic. Maybe "Further".

That section is a list, so yes   User:Dunkleosteus77 |push to talk  18:26, 6 September 2016 (UTC)

Evolution

• Suggest adding a † symbol to mark extinct groupings.

So instead of saying "Thalassocnus", it'd say "†Thalassocnus" in the text?   User:Dunkleosteus77 |push to talk  18:26, 6 September 2016 (UTC)

Yes.

done   User:Dunkleosteus77 |push to talk  01:25, 7 September 2016 (UTC)

• "The term was coined ..." Since the term Cetartiodactyla isn't the title of this article, the sentence is somewhat off-topic here. Actually there are 5 sentences on the topic of the combined grouping, probably too much, for the same reason; suggest revisiting the text to see if the message can be stated more compactly (well, cetaceans evolved from early ungulates).

I'll get to that later   User:Dunkleosteus77 |push to talk  18:26, 6 September 2016 (UTC)

• Pinnipedia split off 50 mya but became aquatic 20-25 mya. Maybe these dates should be side by side, with a brief note on what happened in between. (If we don't know what the evolutionary link is, how do we know the 50 mya date? Is that molecular?)

you mean identify what species of pinniped was living there at that time? 50mya is when Pinnipedia diverged from other Carnivora, 25mya is when Pinnipedia first became aquatic   User:Dunkleosteus77 |push to talk  18:26, 6 September 2016 (UTC)

I mean, can we have a brief word about how the early terrestrial pinnipeds lived before they grew flippers and other recognizably pinnipedian adaptations like closeable nostrils and waterproof fur?

behaviourally or anatomically?   User:Dunkleosteus77 |push to talk  22:34, 8 September 2016 (UTC)

Up to you and the available sources. The 25 mya gap just seems to need some kind of coverage.

• Please add dates to the fossil image captions.

added   User:Dunkleosteus77 |push to talk  18:26, 6 September 2016 (UTC)

And Thalassocnus?

added   User:Dunkleosteus77 |push to talk  01:25, 7 September 2016 (UTC)

• Perhaps "most primitive sirenian" should be "most primitive known sirenian". Text and caption.

fixed   User:Dunkleosteus77 |push to talk  18:26, 6 September 2016 (UTC)

Adaptations

• "have evolved a number features for feeding". Should be "a number of", or better "a variety of".

changed to "...a wide variety of..."   User:Dunkleosteus77 |push to talk  18:26, 6 September 2016 (UTC)

• "are designed specifically" would be better as "are adapted specifically".

fixed   User:Dunkleosteus77 |push to talk  18:26, 6 September 2016 (UTC)

• "Sound travels differently": paragraph could avoid "a number of" and "most notable", and say simply "have developed adaptations" and then give examples - the obvious ones are echolocation, ability to make loud clicks without expelling air, loss of external ears. There is scope here for a diagram or photograph

will get to later   User:Dunkleosteus77 |push to talk  18:26, 6 September 2016 (UTC)

the diagram, isn't specifically referring to the paragraph on sound. The section talks about anatomy, so I thought a diagram on the anatomy of a marine mammal would be appropriate   User:Dunkleosteus77 |push to talk  01:25, 7 September 2016 (UTC)

The anatomy diagram is splendid. I meant, the section is long enough to afford space for another image. You could add a subsection heading and "main" link for "Echolocation" too if that makes it easier - not a bad idea probably - and say a little more on that important topic.

• "Some marine mammals have retained four weight-bearing limbs (such as polar bears and otters) and can walk" would be better as "Some marine mammals such as polar bears and otters have retained ..."

fixed   User:Dunkleosteus77 |push to talk  18:26, 6 September 2016 (UTC)

Distribution and habitat

• "There is a high degree of overlap ... which is of concern". Better would be "The high degree of overlap ... is of concern".

fixed   User:Dunkleosteus77 |push to talk  18:26, 6 September 2016 (UTC)

• "partake in seasonal migrations" -> "migrate seasonally".

fixed   User:Dunkleosteus77 |push to talk  18:26, 6 September 2016 (UTC)

Diet

• "All cetaceans are carnivorous and predatory." One might suppose the two usually went together... It's remarkable that these predators evolved from ungulate-like ancestors. Might be worth mentioning if there's research on early (omnivorous?) Cetartiodactyla.

there is some speculation, I'll add that in later.

added

• Some related items in one paragraph: 1: "are the only marine animal .. which it often does". Please choose singular or plural and stick to it. 2:"the sea otter has a loose pouch of skin that extends across the chest which they use" should be "which it uses". 3: "a rock that is used to" is a somewhat clunky phrase, if not an WP:Easter egg for tool use by sea otters. 4: It's followed by "There, the sea otter eats...": where is "there"? Please copy-edit the paragraph.

will get to later   User:Dunkleosteus77 |push to talk 

fixed   User:Dunkleosteus77 |push to talk  01:25, 7 September 2016 (UTC)

• "manatees have been known to consume": suggest "manatees eat".

fixed (I think)   User:Dunkleosteus77 |push to talk  18:26, 6 September 2016 (UTC)

Keystone species

• wikilink camouflage.

done   User:Dunkleosteus77 |push to talk 

• "feed on most everything". Please reword less colloquially.

any suggestions?   User:Dunkleosteus77 |push to talk  18:26, 6 September 2016 (UTC)

"many species of vertebrate", say.

fixed   User:Dunkleosteus77 |push to talk  01:25, 7 September 2016 (UTC)

• "decimated": suggest "much reduced". Decimated properly means "reduce by 1/10" but is often taken to mean "reduce to 1/10", an awkward ambiguity at best. It feels too rhetorical (WP:NPOV) for the article.

fixed   User:Dunkleosteus77 |push to talk  18:26, 6 September 2016 (UTC)

• "For example, a decline ... no direct evidence." - a conjectural instance is not a good example. If there's nothing better, at least leave out the "For example, " at the start.

done   User:Dunkleosteus77 |push to talk  18:26, 6 September 2016 (UTC)

Whale pump

• promote one level.

done   User:Dunkleosteus77 |push to talk  18:26, 6 September 2016 (UTC)

• "faeces" - are we using UK or American spelling? "favored" in Evolution suggests the latter. Please check whole article for consistency.

sorry, this article uses American English   User:Dunkleosteus77 |push to talk 

Exploitation

• " However, the illegal trade" - Please remove the "However,".

fixed   User:Dunkleosteus77 |push to talk  01:25, 7 September 2016 (UTC)

Protection act

• section implies a USA-centric worldview. Would be better to have a more general title (say, "Legal protection") and to balance American, European, and other legislation and practice.

the Marine Mammal Protection Act of 1972 was enacted by the 92nd United States Congress

Yes it was, but many other countries passed similar legislation around that time, and "the main points" of this need to be addressed. The section's text is unbalanced, not just its title.

added paragraph on CMS   User:Dunkleosteus77 |push to talk  23:33, 7 September 2016 (UTC)

Thankyou, that's certainly an improvement. We still need to mention and link Anti-whaling, including the 1946 International Convention for the Regulation of Whaling, Marine conservation activism, and I suggest Greenpeace (1971).

will get around to that   User:Dunkleosteus77 |push to talk  22:34, 8 September 2016 (UTC)

Cetaceans

• " that are not part of wild killer whale behavior and restricting pool size." Could be better phrased.

fixed   User:Dunkleosteus77 |push to talk  01:25, 7 September 2016 (UTC)

• "two sea otters holding paws". Perhaps a mention of anthropomorphism would be in order here. I suppose in the context the citation to YouTube is inevitable, though it might be better to have a reliable secondary source.

actually it was because they were cute, as most viral animal videos are. Added secondary source   User:Dunkleosteus77 |push to talk  01:25, 7 September 2016 (UTC)

Ok, thanks for the link, that's what I thought. Wikilinked. It is essential that we distinguish "x said otters were cute" from "an editor thought otters were cute", which is WP:OR. I'm not sure we've quite arrived there in this case, I may copyedit slightly. I have given the default upright size to two possibly-cute images for the same reason, to avoid any appearance of WP:OR: the images must be there to inform, not to express an editor's opinion. These images must not be resized post-GA.

the source said that they were cute (and heartwarming). The pinniped photo was referring to the various tricks they are trained to do, not because the sea lion is cute. I chose the military dolphin photo because it was either that or a sort-of faded sea lion photo (and there was already a sea lion photo literally above it). I didn't choose images because they were cute, I chose them because they were good   User:Dunkleosteus77 |push to talk  22:34, 8 September 2016 (UTC)

Thank you for the clarification, that's all fine. I already struck out the item; however, it would be wise to state explicitly that the source stated "cute and heartwarming" (or whatever it did actually say) with a citation right beside it, so that any editor reading the article in future can see where that came from. I've adjusted the pinniped (sealion) caption to read purely factually for the same reason.

Thanks.

• Since the anthropomorphism issue actually affects many marine mammals (it seems people find dolphins and seals cute, as well as otters) it would be best to put a brief cited paragraph about anthropomorphism (visibly wikilinked) at the top of the 'In captivity' section, and perhaps to move all the 'cute' discussion there.

I think you're making a big deal out of anthropomorphism. All I got is a sentence for each.   User:Dunkleosteus77 |push to talk  01:50, 10 September 2016 (UTC)

All right, I'll hold fire on this one. The topic is now certainly adequately covered, thank you. Chiswick Chap (talk) 09:16, 15 September 2016 (UTC)

• The phrase "[dolphins] have a friendly appearance" probably belongs in the 'anthropomorphism' section/paragraph also; whether you move it or not, it needs citing explicitly (by repeating ref 138, if the phrase came from there).

added a sentence   User:Dunkleosteus77 |push to talk  01:50, 10 September 2016 (UTC)

Thanks.

Military

• The coverage of the NMMP seems over-detailed for the context.

• "stresses involved in training are topics of controversy, which is unlike " needs rewording.

I think I fixed it   User:Dunkleosteus77 |push to talk  01:25, 7 September 2016 (UTC)

As this seems to have been abandoned, I'll close it now. If anybody wishes to take up the thread, just submit it to GAN, and feel free to ping me. There's not much left to complete. Chiswick Chap (talk) 20:21, 6 October 2016 (UTC)