Wikipedia

Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Peregrine Falcon

< 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 04:16, 23 October 2007.

Peregrine Falcon edit

This article was the Wikiproject Birds collaboration last month, and now appears to meet FA requirements. Jude. 21:12, 6 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

  • Comment Please fix reference #29. Nishkid64 (talk) 23:05, 6 October 2007 (UTC)  Done[reply]
  • Comments about the map. Why is there different shades of green? And why are the continents broders colored with a darker green? is it because the falcons are concentrated on coasts? And the dark dots are small circles and not visible enough. Could you explain all that? Thank you. CG 08:37, 7 October 2007 (UTC) Done[reply]
    • Also the map is unsourced, this must be fixed. -Ravedave 17:24, 8 October 2007 (UTC) Done[reply]
  • Comment: Can all subspecies and alternative names become redirects to this page? (Example: first subspecies Falco peregrinus peregrinus) Makes it easier to find the article if you come across one of those names and are looking to find out what it is. 74.13.103.58 14:11, 7 October 2007 (UTC) Done[reply]
  • Support - much improved. Comment I'm finding a few spelling errors - if I didn't need to go to bed I'd fix the non-inline refs in Barbary Falcon problem..cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 13:48, 8 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
PS: Also the citation tags still around. cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 13:49, 8 October 2007 (UTC) Done[reply]
  • Comment (1) I'd much rather see a photo of a wild bird in the taxobox. The current pic is a falconry bird in awful atypical habitat (more suited to a Sparrowhawk!), and its identity (given the huge range of hybrids produced by falconers) can't be guaranteed at all. There's a very good USFWS photo Image:Falco peregrinus nest USFWS.jpg with 5½ meg size, which I'd recommend. (2) The map is awful quality, and should be replaced by a new one, preferably in .png format, and preferably with the ranges of the subspecies indicated (tho' that could be tricky with migratory subspecies, finding enough colours to indicate breeding, migration, and wintering ranges). (3) Barbary Falcon - HBW lumps it; I reckon we ought to think more about merging them. (4) Should the colloquial name "Peregrine" (without the 'Falcon' qualifier) be added at the top in bold? It's a lot more used than that archaic "Duck Hawk" (which I reckon should be demoted to non-bold as a footnote of history). (5) Along with black marketeers and eggers, gamekeepers should be added to the human threats (plenty of refs from e.g. the RSPB website). (6) There's a mix of UK and US spellings on the page (looks to be a preponderance of UK though), which should be standardised (/-ized!); as the species is native in both areas neither has location-related priority, and deciding which to follow goes to first major edit, if anyone can remember or wants to delve back into the page's early history. (7) Reference citations are a bit mixed in style, and need standardising; aim for the same style as in ornithologigal publications (e.g. British Birds): Bloggs, J., & Doe, J. (2000). Title of Paper. Journal 10: 20-30. - MPF 08:21, 11 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    • 1, 4, and 5 are done, and I think I've finished 6 and 7. How or where can I get a new map? Is there a site that makes them, or do I need to find a wikipedia user who makes them?Jude. 14:58, 11 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
      • I created a new map. It doesn't show subspecies ranges. There are between 17 or more subspecies; finding enough colors for them would be a problem, finding refs which show their ranges would be a problem, deciding whether to show breeding/migration/whatever range would be an issue, and some subspecies overlap. It's difficult, and I think impractical, to show the subspecies ranges. (Common Raven, which is an FA, does not show the eight subspecies' ranges in its map) --Jude. 21:29, 14 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Agree, unless there are only a few subspecies with well-defined non overlapping ranges it can become a real headache. cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 10:54, 15 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment I would like to see more references cited for some of the statements in the Barbary falcon section that sound like opinions (whose?). Shyamal 04:56, 14 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose Support The large bulleted lists of subspecies are extremely unsightly. There are several instances of single-sentence paragraphs, not exactly the best of prose. The images need serious work per WP:MoS#Images: the lead image is poor (a dark bird on a dark background that is too far away), and the article violates other principles of good image use and placement, such as creating long stacks of images on the same alignment. The external links probably need some paring, and there isn't a Wikispecies link. Most of all, the article only meets the bare minimum of citations; the end of each paragraph and quotes. To be part of the best of Wikipedia, much more comprehensive inline citations are needed. Compare to such FA-class articles as Guinea pig. As this is not a peer review, I'm not going to make a whole laundry list for you to complete right now. VanTucky Talk 21:48, 15 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    • I've put all the subspecies into paragraph form, with the subspecies grouped roughly geographically. If they should be alphabetical, just let me know. I changed the taxobox image and right-aligned all the images. The external links have been cut down and divided into two subsections, the wikispecies link has been added. The citations have also been expanded. Cheers, Jude. 01:22, 17 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
      • Okay, now that's FA-class work. Good job! VanTucky Talk 01:36, 17 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yes

  • If there's anything that makes The Peregrine Falcon stand out or distinctive from the rest of the birds, could you just put that in the lead? Thanks. Some readers just look for and like to know what makes it special or its importance if anything rather then the extensive details. Learnedo 09:36, 19 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Take this FAC bird for example: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Superb_Fairy-wren

You see how the reader can gain an understanding and feel for characteristics of the bird - "Sedentary and territorial..." "Like other fairy-wrens, the Superb Fairy-wren is notable for several peculiar behavioural characteristics; birds are socially monogamous and sexually promiscuous..." Learnedo 09:48, 19 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Map

I'm working on the map to distinguish summer breeding, resident breeding, passage, and winter - might be a few days till I'm done - MPF 14:27, 22 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Done. I've also made a subspecies distribution map (breeding ranges only). This is compiled from the textual range descriptions in HBW, some of which are a bit poorly defined - can someone check it against other published subspecies maps and say here if there's any incorrect boundaries to amend before I add it to the Peregrine article. Thanks, MPF 23:54, 22 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive. 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.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Featured_article_candidates/Peregrine_Falcon&oldid=462957966"