Wikipedia

Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/House Martin

< Wikipedia:Featured article candidates
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 01:01, 4 February 2008.

House Martin

edit
Check external links

Nomination I'm nominating this article for featured article because it has been substantially expanded and improved since GA Jimfbleak (talk) 06:44, 24 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

  • Looking very good Support - couple of very minor things:
The House Martin’s aerial skills protect it from most predators - when I think of 'protect' I think of a shield, maybe "The House Martin’s aerial skills enable it to (successfully) evade most predators" - bracketed word optional.
Also, I am curious as to why the genus is an anagram - find any mention of it anywhere?cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 10:01, 24 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Done, predator bit rephrased as per comment. I've found a better ref (BTO) for the anagram, don't know why they did it, but not unprecedented. The two kingfisher genera Dacelo and Lacedo are similarly derived from a third, Alcedo - laziness? lack of imagination? Jimfbleak (talk) 11:28, 24 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
User:Snowmanradio added citation needed‎ tags throughout the lead. I hadn't realised that everything had to be referenced in the lead as well as in the text, but I've added the required cites. Jimfbleak (talk) 12:03, 24 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Citations in the introduction have been added. Previously it had none, and I thought they would be straightforward to add. See Wikipedia:LEAD#Citations_in_the_lead_section. Snowman (talk) 12:51, 24 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Well, yes, but it says likely to be challenged - does anyone doubt that House Martins build nests from mud and are colonial? Jimfbleak (talk) 13:15, 24 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Point taken, I will remove that one. Snowman (talk) 13:35, 26 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I have put a number of cn tags on the main text of the page. Snowman (talk) 12:51, 24 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Done My understanding was that if all the facts in group of sentences or a paragraph were from the same source, they only needed one ref tag, obviously I was wrong. Jimfbleak (talk) 13:10, 24 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
That has always been my understanding too. When did it change? And since when has anything other than highly controversial material needed to be cited in the lead if it is cited elsewhere in the text? I wish citation reviewers would settle on one system, when I was pushing bird to featured article status one user threw in multiple citation required tags only for me to cite them and then get told by other reviewers that it was over cited. Sabine's Sunbird talk 21:43, 24 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Should there be a notice on the talk page or anywhere else that the article is up for FAC? Snowman (talk) 12:51, 24 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Done my error, I set up the fac using the fac template on the talk page, but must have done it from preview and forgot to save. Jimfbleak (talk) 12:59, 24 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Reference 3 appears to be 8 pages of a book. I did not expect so many references to come from the same book, when I listed the cn tags. Should individual page numbers be included in the reference citation? It is currently probably quite difficult to verify any of the references without reading the whole chapter, but without seeing how the book is layed out I can not sure if there is a better way to narrow down the reference 3s to a sub-chapter heading or a page. A notes section could be used to give the page numbers (or sub-chapter headings). Does the chapter point to a way of how references 3s could be subdivided into smaller blocks of text? Could you say a little more about the book or the chapter? Can the chapter name appear in the reference? Snowman (talk) 13:33, 26 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I don't think the eight pages on the House Martin in Swallows and Martins (which is arranged as series of species accounts ) requires excessive reading, since it all relates to the House Martin. Please indicate where MOS requires listing each ref by a single page number (I do this for isolated facts but not for sources arranged by species like Turner and Cocker, where I just give the relevant range). I have done that for my four previous FAs without objection. I know that some editors use the footnote/ref style, but the style I always use also conforms to MoS, and I have no intention of reworking them all. Basically, if this article is still going to be opposed as inadequately referenced (!!!!!!!!), I'd rather just withdraw it from fac, and abandon Song Thrush ( which I was working up for fac) too. Jimfbleak (talk) 15:53, 26 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
For book sources there is this: Wikipedia:Citing_sources#Provide_page_numbers. Going on what you say about the book, the pages in the book do not need excessive reading to verify the information. You are also confident that the page range given provides easy verification of the text. I have no reason to doubt that. Snowman (talk) 17:18, 26 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Someone asked a question elsewhere about sourcing for this article. I just want to make the point that all the sourcing guidelines have to be approached with common sense. If you have a statement that says House Martins are regularly pressed into service as suicide bombers, we'd need a source, whether it's in the lead or elsewhere. If it's that they build their houses from mud, then no -- if a House Martin specialist ever comes to challenge it, people can find a source at that time. Similarly with page numbers. It's good to have page numbers, but if the issues are straightforward, then don't drive yourself crazy: page ranges are fine, chapter numbers are fine, and if the points are very general and the books are perhaps short, there would be situations where no page numbers were needed. The important point is that this is a really nice-looking, well-written article, so please don't let the letter of the sourcing policies take the fun out of it for you. The spirit is what matters. :-) SlimVirgin (talk)(contribs) 22:10, 26 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Link 22 - about the House Martin flea, is not working at the present time in England, not sure if this is temporary. The problem is shown by the testing tool that is just below the "House Martin" heading at the top of this page. Snowman (talk) 14:02, 27 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
It works for me, and I'm in England - must have been temporary, or the tool is giving a false positive. Jimfbleak (talk) 17:12, 27 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Me too (Scotland). --Red Sunset 20:48, 27 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I am still getting the same problem an a Ubuntu 7.10 system with Firefox. I will try on a windows system another day. Snowman (talk) 21:59, 27 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
for what it's worth, I use XP/Firefox. Jimfbleak (talk) 06:37, 28 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Working on windows with Firefox. Snowman (talk) 17:43, 28 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • There is an inconsistency with the linked wiki page for the "martlet", which does not mention the House Martin. Ref 6 discusses the martlet, House Martin, Dove, Swift and Swallow, but I could not find any statement in ref 6 that the martlet is "usually believed to refer to the House Martin". I do not have access to the source ref 5, which might explain it more. Snowman (talk) 22:36, 27 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The wikipedia article is not, of course, a reliable source, esp as it lacks in-line references(!). I accept that the web page ref does not specifically mention House Martin (these articles aren't written by ornithologists, so martin/swallow/swift are all a bit blurred), and I don't have the cited book (not my ref), so I've added another ref where the annotated text of Macbeth makes it absolutely clear that that martlet can refer to House Martin. If you are unhappy about the web page, take it out, since the Shakespeare bit could cover that content too. Jimfbleak (talk) 07:01, 28 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I've also changed "usually" to "often", less dogmatic. Jimfbleak (talk) 07:06, 28 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • I think more can be said about the remarkable phenomenon of migration. Are there any resting stop offs, feeding on the journey, distance between traveling hops, weight loss, day or night traveling, physiological changes, triggers that start migration, juveniles first migration, survival rates of migration, effects of climate change (ie in Europe and the Sahara Dessert), navigation, flock forming in migration or not. Snowman (talk) 20:34, 29 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I've added what I can find, quite a bit on survival, but nothing at all on navigation. Jimfbleak (talk) 19:28, 30 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
With regard to navigation - it is unlikely that it has been studied in any one individual species. I guess it is inferred that House Martins navigate in much the same way as any other small passerine. Sabine's Sunbird talk 21:36, 30 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Is Passerine bird migration on on another wikipage that can be wikiliked? Snowman (talk) 21:51, 31 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
No, just [bird migration]]
Is a section on migration needed? Snowman (talk) 20:46, 30 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
There's really only one para. Jimfbleak (talk) 21:09, 30 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
"Osprey" has a shortish section on migration. Snowman (talk) 18:54, 1 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
It would make more sense for migration to be combined with distribution (since they cover in essence where they are and when. And how.) Sabine's Sunbird talk 01:07, 2 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Done Jimfbleak (talk) 07:15, 2 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I can only guess what a broad-front migrant is. Broad-front is not used on the "Bird migration" wiki page. Do they fly over the Sahara Desert or go around it? Do they fly over the Mediterranean Sea? How long does migration take? Snowman (talk) 21:49, 31 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
added these except time taken - can't find anything. Jimfbleak (talk) 07:21, 1 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
"By the end of October, most Martins have left their breeding areas, though late birds in November and December are not uncommon." The source is a book about British birds, so do these dates apply to the birds that have migrated to North Africa, Europe or the ones in the east? I have not got access to the source. Can the migration dates (months or season) be put in the migration paragraph? Snowman (talk) 14:30, 1 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I've replaced with another Turner ref Jimfbleak (talk) 16:28, 1 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Can the migration dates (months or season) of the spring migration be included? Snowman (talk) 17:48, 1 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
done Jimfbleak (talk) 17:59, 1 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The migration details are mainly in the habitat section (which is not an obvious place to find this information), and other migration information is in other sections, making presentation an issue. Snowman (talk) 18:39, 1 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • The incubation time given on the page is much longer than given here as 13 to 19 days. I have not got access to reference 3, but I checked it in one of my books which also does not agree with the article. Snowman (talk) 09:54, 2 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Done I inadvertently put nestling range as incubation, Turner's normal period now falls within the range you quoted Jimfbleak (talk) 11:03, 2 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • "There are records of wintering House Martins staying to breed in Namibia and South Africa." This lacks clarity. Snowman (talk) 11:07, 2 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Done Can't see why it's not clear, but reworded anyway. Take it out if still not happy. Jimfbleak (talk) 15:08, 3 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
It is still not clear because this could be 4 House Martins seen twice 20 years ago or 200 years ago and never again, or it could mean that 5000 pairs or more have been seen their regularly every year. It also dose not indicate if there are 2 records or 2000 records. I do not know how important this is and I have no extra information on this, and so I can not do any editing on it at the present time. I guess that if the climate was suitable and there were plenty of flying insects they might not need to migrate. Non migrating House Martins sounds interesting and I would not like to see this deleted, if it was an established regular phenomenon. Snowman (talk) 17:44, 3 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
SASOL just says "has bred" and map just shows as summer visitor, so presumably rare, but i can't find any more. I suppose the whole point of HM and Barn Swallow heading northe is that they avoid competition with the resident hirundines. Jimfbleak (talk) 20:18, 3 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
"There are records": sounds like weasel words. Is "Some HMs stay in N and SA ...." consistent with the reference? Snowman (talk) 00:22, 4 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • "Fledge" - this can mean when chicks have got their feathers or when they leave the nest. Clarity needed. Snowman (talk) 11:26, 2 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Done Jimfbleak (talk) 13:28, 2 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Featured_article_candidates/House_Martin&oldid=1146359607"