Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Masked booby/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 Laser brain via FACBot (talk) 19 July 2019 [1].


Masked booby edit

Nominator(s): Aa77zz & Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 10:59, 10 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

This article is about another sulid. I reckon it is as comprehensive and easy to read as I can make it. Lemme know what ta fix and I will fix pronto. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 10:59, 10 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

FunkMonk edit

  • Will have a look soon. At first glance, I see a bunch of duplinks. FunkMonk (talk) 21:50, 10 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
removed - apart from two that lead to different sections on another page - flight feather. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 03:41, 13 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • I think a photo of a bird in flight should always be shown, for identification purposes. A selection here:[2]
Choice limited. I've added a low resolution picture of an adult. This is high res and clearly shows underwing but is a juvenile.
How about this[3] free one on Flickr? Maybe the flying image could be placed under description (it could be at upper left with the juveniles lower right), now it seems to clash with the tasmani photo under the taxobox. FunkMonk (talk) 19:45, 11 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
That looks good. I will look at getting it from flickr to commons tomorrow. Had a busy day and need to sleep added now Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 14:52, 12 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Likewise, though you do show an egg (in shadow and foreshortened perspective), this image might be a good addition to show the characteristics of the egg better:[4]
was trying to be economical with images, as there are alot with different aspects to show. agree this one is clearer, but is the article too image-heavy....will look tomorrow. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 14:52, 12 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I agree articles shouldn't be galleries. But I always feel that if we have good images, we should always show the eggs as clear as possible, and the bird both as it looks on the ground and in flight (then Wikipedia can work as a visual field guide too). But I can also see that the current image with both a chick and an egg could serve to do this, though the egg is not very clear. There are no images in the last chunk of the article though, so I imagined the egg could be right aligned by sentence "Although two eggs are often laid" (or it could be placed where the current chick image is, which would then be moved down). FunkMonk (talk) 01:17, 13 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I made a vertical gallery of sorts Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 23:52, 13 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • I wonder why the tiny Tasman booby needs to be a separate article, unlike all the other subspecies? Could easily be covered fully here, it seems to only contain some info on its taxonomic history. It sseperation seems to simply be a remnant from back when the fossils were thought to belong to a distinct species, but there seems to be no justification for separation now.
I agree - I had intended to make this change. Tasman booby now a redirect. Aa77zz (talk) 07:33, 11 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah I agree with this too. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 13:08, 11 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Show cladogram?
Not sure it adds terribly much, and we are at a premium of image-space with lots of useful images Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 20:32, 13 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I won't push this issue further, but cladograms can usually create more room for images though, see for example Echo parakeet or Cuban macaw. FunkMonk (talk) 20:50, 13 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Ah ok, I was thinking of it in an image box, but your way is good when we have lots of images. So done now Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 22:19, 14 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • "A genetic study using both nuclear and mitochondrial DNA" Date, authors?
Year added. I avoid adding authors unless they are notable. Aa77zz (talk) 07:40, 11 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • "The adult is almost wholly bright white with a dark face mask." and "The bare skin around the face, throat and lores is black". seems to describe the same feature in different ways, could it be consolidated?
Rejigged Aa77zz (talk) 07:33, 12 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • "Backward-pointing serrations line the mandibles." I assume this refers to both the upper and lower jaws? Mandible only refers to the lower jaw, though.
It seems that ornithologists use mandible for both the maxilla and the mandible. The cited source has "upper and lower mandibles". The wiki article Beak#Mandibles also has "upper mandible". What do you suggest? Aa77zz (talk) 10:12, 11 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
If it's common jargon, it should be fine. FunkMonk (talk) 19:45, 11 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • "The iris is yellow except for the subspecies S. d. tasmani where the iris is dark brown." Why not "it is" at second "the iris", instead of repetition?
Fixed. Aa77zz (talk) 07:21, 11 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • The image you use of the juvenile does not show the collar on the neck well, and is unsharp, how about one of these?[5][6]
Swapped image - much better Aa77zz (talk) 08:53, 11 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • You don't show a breeding colony in the section, how about this?[7]
nice find. added Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 21:04, 11 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • How are the subspecies distinguished? Size only?
as far as I can tell yes, bar tasmani s iris colour. Will double check on this.
hbw claims the bare parts of the 4 ssp differ and gives descriptions: eg dactylatra has yellow-orange legs, personata has "drab olive to bluish grey (sometimes blackish)" legs.
Description of the ssp differences now added. Pitman & Jehl 1998 also tabulate the bare part colours in their Table 3 Aa77zz (talk) 09:56, 12 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 21:04, 11 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

  • You mention a synonym was based on a blue face, yet no blue faces are mentioned under description? Is it because there is variation, or because the same mask pattern can be described in both ways?
I believe that the latter is correct - the source, Marchant & Higgins (HANZAB), uses both black and blue-black. I've added blue-black to the article. Looking at photos on the internet the skin appears black rather than blue-black. Aa77zz (talk) 08:08, 11 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • You give binomials for some animals mentioned in the latter part of the article, but not for related boobies in the beginning of the article. Could be consolidated.
Binomials added in the Taxonomy section and one removed later. Aa77zz (talk) 09:06, 11 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • "of the United States,, with single" Double comma.
Fixed Aa77zz (talk) 20:09, 11 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • "though the island fauna's regeneration after the removal of feral animals" Considering the preceding text (#with devegetation by feral animals creating open ground"), I'd assume you mean flora?
oops yes changed Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 03:43, 13 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • "nests have been destroyed by green sea turtles" How and why?
looks like they just trash booby nests inadvertently as they pass through and dig their own nests. Clarified. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 04:17, 13 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • "It may be that overfishing of tuna might adversely" Is the might needed when you already said it may be?
might deleted Aa77zz (talk) 08:40, 12 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • "negatively impacted on breeding on Christmas Island" Is the first on needed?
Removed Aa77zz (talk) 08:34, 12 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • "Where usually 1500 pairs nested, zero young were observed" Wouldn't it be more straightforward to just say no young?
Changed Aa77zz (talk) 08:37, 12 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • "The masked booby is a spectacular diver, plunging vertically or near-vertically from heights of anywhere from 12 to 100 m (40 to 330 ft)—but more commonly 15 to 35 m (50 to 115 ft)—above the water into the ocean at high speed, to depths of up to 3 m (9.8 ft)." Is this solely to feed? If it is, that could be explicitly stated, if not, it seems it would belong with the text directly under the behaviour header, which is about flight.
Yes it is solely to feed, which I thought was implied by its location under 'feeding'.clarified Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 00:07, 14 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • "Fish, particularly flying fish... form the bulk of its diet," is followed by "various species of flying fish", which seems needlessly repetitive. You could make it less so by listing the flying fish species, or somehow consolidating the sentences otherwise.
listed species Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 05:34, 14 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • "that school near the surface" Only stated in the intro.
removed that Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 05:34, 14 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • The feeding section says "The masked booby is a spectacular diver", but the intro says "These birds are plunge divers and spectacular fishers" Could it be consolidated?
Yes/done Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 00:11, 14 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • "Masked boobies form monogamous relationships, many of which remain together over multiple breeding seasons." Not sure if a relationship can "remain together", is "together" needed here?
Sentence rejigged Aa77zz (talk) 08:50, 12 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • "he paces slowly with its neck and bill" Seems odd you go from "he" to "its" instead of "his". You also say his elsewhere.
Changed to his Aa77zz (talk) 09:06, 12 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • "a bird flings their head vigorously" Its?
Changed Aa77zz (talk) 09:02, 12 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • "as the none is actually used in adorning" Redundant the?
Removed Aa77zz (talk) 07:36, 12 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • "At birth, the chicks are about" Are animals that hatch form eggs usually said to be born? Wouldn't something like "after hatching" or some such be more appropriate?
Fixed Aa77zz (talk) 08:23, 12 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • "24 years 9.9 months later" 24 years and?
done Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 00:18, 14 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • "The longest distance travelled is 3,152 km (1,959 mi); a bird tagged at Raine Island in December 1981 was found picked up and released at Phillip Island in December 1986." Why is this under breeding? Seems it would fit better at the beginning of the behaviour section.
I had intended to make the section Breeding and lifespan to accommodate this, but forgot. However, the behaviour section is so stubby it can go there fine. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 00:18, 14 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Also about the above sentence, it would help convey the distance if you stated where these islands are located.
context added Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 05:34, 14 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Dimensions of the egg?
Added Aa77zz (talk) 07:32, 12 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support - looks very nice to me now, last minor point is that flying fish should be linked at first mention instead of second in the feeding section. FunkMonk (talk) 23:50, 14 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
oops fixed Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 03:59, 15 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
@FunkMonk: Thanks for your support and your thorough review. Aa77zz (talk) 08:04, 15 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Sources review edit

  • Verifiabilty:
  • Check link in ref 26. I am getting "Warning: Potential Security Risk Ahead"
removed url - doi gives access to article Aa77zz (talk) 20:31, 16 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Ref 51: unable to connect to this site
link-rot - it worked last week but is now dead. I'll try to find a replacement Aa77zz (talk) 20:31, 16 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Replaced with a cite to a different source Aa77zz (talk) 21:13, 18 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Ref 57: This links to a search site; can you explain how I could use this site to verify the multiple information found in the second paragraph of the "Behaviour" section?
now linked to result of search Aa77zz (talk) 20:31, 16 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Ref 70: Link does not go to the stated page.
link gave wrong page when I first tried - but now works correctly. I'm puzzled. Aa77zz (talk) 20:39, 16 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • General: some of the page ranges are very extensive, and create serious problems for verification, e.g. ref 2, 83–103; ref 16, 174–220; ref 25, 35–57; ref 46, 257–84; ref 51, 169–92; ref 61, 148–67; ref 66, 2–23.
ref 2 fixed, ref 16 is used 5 times - pages supporting the 5 statements are 174 (first), 186-186 (second), 194-197 (fourth and fifth), the third one I can't find but I didn't add that. Will look at the other one. Checking others and musing on how best to implement the pages identified. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 01:58, 17 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I've moved Ref 16 (Dorward 1962) to Sources and cited using sfn. (Cas - you added the third cite to ref 16 with this edit when you switched from HANZAB to Dorward. Both were correct - HANZAB cites Dorward (where the info is on p.179)) Aa77zz (talk) 10:20, 17 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Formats : no issues
  • Quality and reliability: Overall, the sources appear to be comprehensive, and to meet the standards requitred by the FA criteria.

Brianboulton (talk) 16:05, 16 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Image review edit

  • ALT text missing for all images
alts all added now Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 14:06, 17 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • All images are appropriately licensed with links to sources where necessary
  • Some of the captions could use a bit of expanding for context, e.g. the infobox image (is it a male or female?), and the chick (where was it taken?)
captions expanded Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 14:06, 17 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Not too sure about the caption on the tasmani breeding pair; I think it would work better as a complete sentence (perhaps A breeding pair of subspecies tasmani and their chick, Norfolk Island). Note that Norfolk Island should probably be linked in the caption and the first instance in the body. SounderBruce 16:36, 16 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
tweaked as suggested. thanks for review Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 14:06, 17 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Looks good, though I would like to see ALT text on the map (describing the general extent). SounderBruce 06:24, 21 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by Wehwalt edit

Here are some initial comments. I'm tired and when I'm tired I miss stuff so I'll finish the rest of it tomorrow.
  • "Nesting takes place in colonies, generally on islands and atolls far from mainland and close to deep water required for foraging." I might have put a "the" before "mainland" and before "deep", but it might be an ENGVAR thing.
yes to the first, but no to the second ("the deep water" sounds really weird to me...) Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 03:59, 20 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • "The French naturalist René-Primevère Lesson was a member of the crew on the French corvette La Coquille captained by Louis Isidore Duperrey on its voyage around the world undertaken between August 1822 and March 1825.[2] " I might cut one of the "French", possibly the first instance.
I removed the second, as we've been introducing names with their nationalities and callings consistently, and instead hoping the bluelink for the boat (and hte captain) will explain the voyage Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 03:59, 20 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • "The American Ornithological Union followed in their 17th supplement to their checklist in 1920." I would change the first "their" to "the".--Wehwalt (talk) 01:39, 20 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
done now Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 03:59, 20 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • "Hartlaub described this taxon in 1859 from Maydh Island off the coast of Somalia near Maydh." The latter part of the sentence seems a bit awkward.
Dammit, why couldn't they have been more creative with the naming....tried this, is that ok? Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 01:49, 21 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • "Meanwhile, large prehistoric specimens known from the former and Norfolk Island were classified as a separate species," If by "the former" you mean Lord Howe Island I would just say it.
tweaked now Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 01:46, 21 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • " as well waters off the coast of Spain.[43]" Should there be an "as" before "waters"? I started to add one then got concerned it might be ENGVAR.
not ENGVAR but mistake. fixed now Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 01:46, 21 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • "was found picked up and released at Phillip Island (off Norfolk Island) in December 1986.[57]" Are both "found" and "picked up" needed?
no - tweaked now Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 01:46, 21 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • "parasitizing" Is this correct or should it be "parasitizing"?
changed to brit spelling - though in Oz we do brit spelling + "ize" most of the time Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 01:19, 21 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • "Other argasid ticks Ornithodoros capensis and the ixodid tick Amblyomma loculosum have also been recorded as parasites," I would think "ticks" should be "tick" (with the opening words adjusted to fit) but maybe not.
yes - I rejigged this bit a bit to make it flow smoother Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 01:54, 21 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
That's pretty much it. I made some direct edits you might want to review. All else looks good.--Wehwalt (talk) 00:25, 21 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
your changes are fine Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 01:19, 21 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Support Well done. Another one for the birds.--Wehwalt (talk) 02:35, 21 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
thx! Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 04:43, 21 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Comments from JM edit

  • "This species ranges across tropical oceans, except in the eastern Atlantic; in the eastern Pacific it is replaced by the Nazca booby (Sula granti) which was formerly regarded as a subspecies of masked booby." So it's absent in the eastern Pacific in addition to the eastern Atlantic?
tweaked Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 01:20, 1 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Could I recommend against the gendered term man-made?
I just removed both "natural and man-made" anyway Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 01:20, 1 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Could you introduce Hartlaub? How about O'Brien and Davies? Holdaway? Steeves? Pitman? There's a little inconsistency in how you introduce new people!
done for all bar O'Brien and Davies, whose first names nor occupations can I find.... Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 13:41, 2 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Do we need the bold on "Tasman booby"?
probably not - removed Aa77zz (talk) 19:44, 30 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • "now known as S. d. tasmani as it has priority over S. d. fullagari" Tricky; the it is perhaps unclear, here.
tweaked Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 13:41, 2 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • It'd be helpful to identify the subspecies in the captions, perhaps?
added Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 14:51, 2 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • "The latter nests on steeper cliffs rather than flat ground" Steeper than what? Why not simply steep?
fixed Aa77zz (talk) 19:44, 30 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • The Newport vagrant mention feels a little out-of-place, but that may be just me.
the segments are related to oceans, hence the Newport is after the Pacific range and the other American ones after the Atlantic Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 01:20, 1 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Quite right; consider the comment retracted! Josh Milburn (talk) 16:22, 2 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Link for Cypselurus melanocerus?
fixed - now Atlantic flyingfish (Cheilopogon melanurus) Aa77zz (talk) 20:03, 30 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Perhaps some pictures of prey species would add some visual interest?
added one. musing on layout... Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 14:55, 2 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Links for the tick species?
added Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 14:51, 2 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • "On Clipperton Island, rats prey on the crab that eats vegetation, hence increased vegetation growth reduces the bare ground suitable for nesting sites." This has already been mentioned.
trimmed Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 20:35, 3 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • I suspect I know the answer, but: Any cultural significance? Have humans ever hunted them for any reason?
nothing's really come up so far on the former. You'd reckon they were eaten, and there is something in the paleoecology ones. Will have another look. I just stumbled over something else that should be added that I need to digest and add. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 21:33, 2 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

This strikes me as a very strong article, and I'm sure I will be supporting soon (though I've not looked at the images on sourcing in any detail). Please double-check my edits. Josh Milburn (talk) 16:24, 30 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

A few comments on images:

  • I'm struggling a little with the sourcing on the Starr images (lead and breeding sites images). This is probably my problem rather than yours, but could you double-check?
we've used alot of their images over the past decade. Will take a look. Their image use policy is linked from the image file page, and is comaptible with en.wiki guidelines. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 21:33, 2 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
leaving it at more restrictive option as a safeguard, which was also specifically attached to that image on flickr Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 03:42, 3 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Other than that, great. Josh Milburn (talk) 16:44, 2 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

okay @J Milburn: you're happy to support then? Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 06:03, 11 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, happy to! Josh Milburn (talk) 06:20, 11 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Support. Josh Milburn (talk) 06:20, 11 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

thx! Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 14:41, 14 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.