Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Elfin-woods Warbler

Elfin-woods Warbler edit

Looks close to, if not ready for, FA status SP-KP 22:47, 12 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

~~Conditional~~ support I did some copyediting and fixed several problem sentences. Take a look at this one - I couldn't figure out what it was saying! "Nests are built within dry aerial leaf litter, a material used by no other Parulidae species, usually Cecropia leaves in Bulbophyllum wadsworthii trees, close to the tree trunk." I like the self-made maps and the article seems complete for the topic that it covers. Getting rid of the red links would be wonderful, of course...great job! InvictaHOG 03:59, 13 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I will try to fix the sentence you mentioned. The red links might be a long shot for me since I have few references for the trees. The most I could do is create a stub for them. Joelito (talk) 15:36, 13 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I have changed the sentence although it may still read awkward. Please let me know if it needs further editing. Joelito (talk) 22:32, 13 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

My concerns were addressed. Thanks! InvictaHOG 03:08, 14 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Conditional Support. Looks good, but are those references standard? I'm not familiar with this style of referencing, I haven't seen it before, but it seems adequate. If it is a Wikipedia-approved referencing style, count this as a full support. RyanG e rbil10 (Drop on in!) 04:24, 13 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I also find them a bit weird. I would prefer more referencing throughout the article, and the use of a standard numerical system. Everyking 07:54, 13 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

~~I will convert the referencing style.~~Referencing style has been converted to cite.php Joelito (talk) 15:05, 13 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Support Jeronimo 06:43, 13 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Having page numbers, where there are pages, for the references would help readers find specific information. In the case of quotations, page numbers are vital. In the case of articles pulled from the web, another form of reference might be appropriate when a quotation is cited. The article could be improved by a picture of the Black & White Warbler for comparison purposes (I know there's a link, but when the article gives tells for identification, it's customary to show the two species side by side). Geogre 12:14, 13 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I have been trying to find a free picture of a Black-and-white Warbler but I have not found any yet. If anyone has one feel free to add it. I could change the references to cite.php since most people are unfamiliar with Harvard style. Joelito (talk) 15:05, 13 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ooooh, on the contrary, I vastly, vastly prefer parenthetical reference. I was just saying that you need page numbers when you have a quotation, and, generally, the parenthetical references aren't superscripted. I think MLA style citation is now extremely common in the US and UK and Aus/NZ. In fact, footnotes are pretty rare. Geogre 16:39, 13 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I changed it nonethless since it was problematic for most users. I personally use parenthetical references but Wikipedia software does not support it. Joelito (talk) 18:14, 13 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Comment The final paragraph, about the bird's conservation status, mixes risk catergories of the USFWS, IUCN, and Birdlife. I think you should the difference between those statuses clear. The way it is written now, you would think that the USFWS has changed the status of the warbler, but the USFWS does not have catergories of lower risk/least concern, etc. The USFWS considers it a candidate species, so it would have a listing priority number (the lower the number, the more concern for the species). That would be published in the federal register, and may well have changed along with the other conservation assessments. Good work on the article! Matthias5 01:00, 14 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

~~I will work on clarifying this. Joelito (talk) 14:13, 14 June 2006 (UTC)~~ I have clarified the different status of the species. Joelito (talk) 17:39, 14 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Could you modify the range map, by including a world map which shows the exact location of puerto rico? CG 20:32, 14 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry but I cannot, I am not very skilled when it comes to graphics. Maybe someone else can help in this regard. Joelito (talk) 20:54, 14 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I have fixed the map issue. Raul654 10:00, 18 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Support - Sure! -- Rmrfstar 09:13, 19 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Support - Nice work. Sabine's Sunbird talk 04:45, 20 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]