Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Crescent Honeyeater/archive1

The following is an archived discussion of a featured article nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured article candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.

The article was promoted by Ucucha 11:07, 24 December 2011 [1].

Crescent Honeyeater

Featured article candidates/Crescent Honeyeater/archive1

Nominator(s): Casliber (talk · contribs) 20:02, 25 November 2011 (UTC), Mdk572 (talk · contribs)[reply]

Mdk572 (talk · contribs) and I have been buffing this article for a bit. It's got just about everything content-wise and formatted out. Prose has been tweaked here and there and I think it's in line with other featured bird articles. Have at it. There are two of us nomming so we should deal with comments double-quick :) Casliber (talk · contribs) 20:02, 25 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Source review - spotchecks not done. Nikkimaria (talk) 03:45, 27 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Check for minor inconsistencies like doubled periods

Marj got 'em Casliber (talk · contribs) 10:10, 27 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Not following the page notation on FN 5 - translation please?

Clarified citation of a plate in an unpaginated work Marj (talk) 18:45, 29 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Be consistent in whether ISBNs are hyphenated or not. Nikkimaria (talk) 03:45, 27 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Marj aligned them Casliber (talk · contribs) 10:10, 27 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Support ~~and comments~~ looks good, just some queries Jimfbleak - talk to me? 11:32, 29 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Least Concern — Is this normally italicised in bird articles?

In my experience (limited) see White-bellied Sea Eagle Marj (talk) 18:45, 29 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Certhia — is it worth mentioning that this is because of an assumed relationship to the treecreepers?

Added Marj (talk) 18:45, 29 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

0.3 birds per hectare (2.5 acres) — Surely the parenthetical bit should be the more helpful "birds per acre" (0.12 I make it) rather than just telling us how many acres to a hectare.

Changed both to convert birds not acres. Marj (talk) 18:45, 29 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

London, United Kingdom — a bit too American for my liking, also inconsistent with Oz publishers which are given as "Queensland" etc rather than "Australia". For major cities like London, Brisbane, Melbourne, this style is a bit too reminiscent of "Paris, France" for my British taste Jimfbleak - talk to me? 11:32, 29 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

You're saying Paris isn't in Texas? Will go through the refs. Marj (talk) 18:45, 29 November 2011 (UTC) Left ststes for Kenmore Hills and East Roseville, removed them from London, Paris Sydney. Marj (talk) 19:47, 29 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Comment I'm going through doing a series of minor copyedits. Feel free to check through them and revert any that you don't like. --99of9 (talk) 12:53, 30 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

looks good so far. Casliber (talk · contribs) 13:03, 30 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Support Finished. The text all reads fine to me now. --99of9 (talk) 13:41, 30 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

thanks :) Casliber (talk · contribs) 13:45, 30 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Image review

File:Phylidonyris_pyrrhopterus_male.jpg: I got an error message trying to load the source, can you verify? This also applies to File:Crescent_Honeyeater_Male.jpg and File:Phylidonyris_pyrrhopterus_-_Austin's_Ferry.jpg. Nikkimaria (talk) 03:02, 12 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The photographer is JJ Harrison (talk · contribs) who used to be known as "Noodle snacks", so is an active editor. Not sure why his personal website is down but not sure that impacts greatly on state of play as he uploaded them. Casliber (talk · contribs) 03:49, 12 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

[Edit conflict] User:Noodle snacks is the old username of User:JJ Harrison, who is a prolific contributor of own work on Commons. So this is own work, and the copyright release is fine. The URL is not provided as a source, but as his preferred attribution, but obviously it's down at the moment which he may or may not know about. --99of9 (talk) 04:02, 12 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Support A concern I often raise regarding articles on Wikipedia is their general lack of readability. One must be an expert on the topic to benefit from the article; sometimes the outcome of the FA process as authors are pushed into greater technicality and detail to satisfy the experts in field. However, I found this article to be most clear and other than a minor concern over song flights (addressed on the talk page), I feel I leave with a solid understanding of our feathered friend. It addresses all the questions that a non-expert as myself may have regarding the natural history, morphology, and taxonomy of this bird. Assuming it meets the technical requirements; I feel confident the prose and content represent the highest of standards.--JimmyButler (talk) 23:28, 12 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

thanks for that - and thanks for queries on the talk page. Looking into them. Cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 00:48, 13 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.