Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Markham's storm petrel/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 archived by Gog the Mild via FACBot (talk) 11 March 2023 [1].


Nominator(s): Therapyisgood (talk) 03:05, 29 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

This article is about Markham's storm petrel, described as "one of the least known seabirds in the world". This passed GA in 2020 with a review by Dunkleosteus77 (talk · contribs). A peer review by Z1720 (talk · contribs) in 2021. Thus, I bring to you this article for FAC consideration. Thank you in advance for all those who review. I have asked for a co-nom at Wikipedia:WikiProject Birds, that is still open if you're familiar with the topic. Therapyisgood (talk) 03:05, 29 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Image review

Support Comments from Jim

edit

An initial query or two about referencing style. Firstly, you use sentence case for Spanish article titles, and title case for English titles, including translation of the Spanish. How does this fit with MoS? Secondly, you need to italicise binomials in article titles as well as in the text Jimfbleak - talk to me? 09:46, 29 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

12:01, 29 January 2023 (UTC)

  • I think that the only other comments I'd make is that the appearance of the egg is under Description, rather than breeding, which seems odd, and that BoW gives the mean egg size as 32.2 x 24.2 mm (n = 155; 16). Jimfbleak - talk to me? 09:16, 30 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Therapyisgood, I think we are nearly there. As far as I can see, you haven't added the egg data above. With regard to the map, unless its creator can enlighten you (hasn't edited at commons for a year), you might well have to redraw using an identified blank map from commons. The range obviously won't be exact, but we need to know what source you use, and we tend to use blue for non-breeding, see project page Jimfbleak - talk to me? 11:56, 1 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]


Queries Support by WereSpielChequers

edit

Thanks for writing this, I learned something here

Jens

edit

I think that the Taxonomy section needs work. I felt that it is too vague; the succession of information suboptimal; and hard to follow. Some details below to illustrate this:

  • In 2016, the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN) reclassified Oceanodroma markhami as Hydrobates markhami based on HBW and BirdLife International Illustrated Checklist of the Birds of the World, volume 1, by Josep del Hoyo and British ornithologist Nigel J. Collar. – Not sure here, but shouldn't this sentence organised the other way around: If del Hoyo first introduced the combination "Hydrobates markhami" (this is what you want to say?), then this should be stated first. If needed, you then could add that this has then been adopted by the IUCN (if this is important; maybe it can also be removed). This way, it is in chronological order and much less confusing.
  • This PeerJ paper (https://peerj.com/articles/12669/), in Fig. 1, has a wonderful photograph of this species in dorsal view in flight. That would be a great addition to the article; the image is under a free licence!
  • the whitening produces a broad grayish bar that generally extends closer to the wing's bend than what American ornithologist Robert Cushman Murphy observed as a somewhat similar mark in the black petrel Loomelania melania (Procellaria parkinsoni) – this is a bit too long to read and comprehend in one go, I suggest to make two sentences out of it.
  • Is above sentence talking about the upper side of the wings? That is not clear to me, too.
  • Murphy described the species as difficult to distinguish in life from the black petrel, with the chief difference being a much shorter tarsus. – This could be misleading, as it might suggest that this is the only feature for differentiation. However, the band on the upper side of the wings seems to be the key feature. I suggest to group these two together, and reformulate to make it clear how these species are separated.
  • Two female specimens taken from 00°18′N 81°51′W in August 1967, both with small gonads and unused oviducts, had heavy contour molt and light fat. – Optional: I am not sure what to make out of this information; a bit of context here would greatly help. What are the implications of this observation?
  • "no known morphological differences between adults and juveniles", even in hand – I think that WP:MOS somewhere requires page numbers for quotes.
  • Markham's storm petrel has a more leisurely flight pattern than that of the black petrel – should this simply be "then the black petrel"?
  • and state that Markham's storm petrel has a similar flight pattern to Leach's storm petrel. – this could be much shortened to avoid repetition of "Markham's storm petrel" again in the same sentence.
  • petrel typically flies greater than one meter – I am not an English expert, but wondering if this should better be "more" instead of "greater"
  • Canadian author RGB Brown – any reason you don't call him an ornithologist? He publishes a lot of technical literature, and alone for this reason should qualify as one?
  • the birds tended to glide over two observations, with shallow and rapid wingbeats,[18] though an observation by American ornithologist Rollo Beck described its wingbeats as slow – I can't follow this one. First, what does "over two observations" mean? Second, how does Beck's statement contradict this (as implied by "though")?
  • After further exploration in November 2013 based on the recording,[20][26] in 2019, – I can't quite follow; is it 2013 or 2019 when the discovery was made?
  • Both the female and male engage in duties related to incubation. – Does that simply mean they both incubate? If so, it could be formulated as such. Otherwise it is not clear what "duties related to incubation" are; all activities within the breeding season are to some degree related to incubation.
  • Mean width of the widest part of openings to nest burrows in Chile was measured at 10.3 centimetres (4.1 in) with a standard deviation of ± 3.1 centimetres (1.2 in), with the narrowest part measured at 6.8 centimetres (2.7 in) with a deviation of ± 1.9 centimetres (0.75 in). The average depth of the burrows was greater than 40 centimetres (16 in). – Optional: In my opinion, the standard deviations are excessive detail that makes it hard to read. It could be shortened to "On average, the nest burrows were 40 cm deep; the burrow openings were 10.3 cm wide at their widest part and 6.8 cm at their narrowest part."
  • The average depth of the burrows was greater than – this does not make sense: Is it an average depth, or a minumum depth (as suggested by "greater than")?
  • After hatching, in Chile, the fledglings move towards the sea after a chick phase. – "quick" compared to what? As it is, the "quick" does not convey any information. Better be more specific with a measured time span if that is available. I am also not sure what that means – moving towards the sea: Do they stay on the shore or do they swim (while still being fed by their parents)?
  • The proportion of birds that feed or rest, compared to flying in transit, was significantly higher in austral autumn than spring in Spear and Ainley's 2007 study. – Here, I think the reader wants to know what this proportion is. How much food is consumed while flying, how much while resting? The information that this proportion is higher in autumn seems to be of secondary importance?
  • Medrano combined a new colony description with previous findings by Barros in 2019 – 2019 referrs to Medrano or Barros?
  • 3,300 fledglings had been grounded due to their lights – How can a fledgling become grounded? If it can fly, it is no longer a fledgling, right?
  • the Chilean MMA produced a Recuperación, Conservación y Gestión de Especies [Recovery, Conservation and Management of Species] plan – difficult to read; I would use the English translation only, and if the Spanish original is needed it could be placed in a footnote.
  • as updating a light pollution standard to mitigate the effects of artificial lights on the birds – does "updating" mean that such a standard already exist?
  • Description of the voice is missing?

Funk

edit
Therapyisgood, nudge. Gog the Mild (talk) 13:47, 8 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Gog the Mild: I want to withdraw this for now. Therapyisgood (talk) 03:34, 11 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Withdrawn as requested. Note that the two-week hiatus will apply.


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