Wikipedia:Featured article review/Hawksbill sea turtle/archive1

The following is an archived discussion of a featured article review. Please do not modify it. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page or at Wikipedia talk:Featured article review. No further edits should be made to this page.

The article was delisted by Nikkimaria via FACBot (talk) 2:55, 30 April 2022 (UTC) [1].

Hawksbill sea turtle

Notified: Shrumster, Lfstevens, WikiProject Southeast Asia, WikiProject Brazil, WikiProject Turtles, WikiProject Amphibians and Reptiles, talk page notice 2022-01-16

Review section

This article no longer meets the FA criteria. There are a lot of statements that need citations. There is an evolutionary history section that only contains a single paragraph that could be merged somewhere. Almost the entire article could be needed for rewriting and expansion, especially the anatomy and morphology, evolutionary history, etymology, and taxonomic history and conservation sections. There are also some questionable sources have been used at the article such as ref 2? ref 11, ref 12, ref 24, ref 26, ref 54? ref 56? and possibly others. OnlyFixingProse (talk) 22:40, 31 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Certainly not up to par. The lead in 2007 covered more in the article. CMD (talk) 02:28, 1 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Of the refs mentioned in the nomination statement: Ref 2 looks fine, I'd say CITES is a reliable source for conservation status, ref 11 should probably be replaced for the claim it is supporting, I would say ref 12 is okay as National Geographic is generally fine, 24 needs replaced, 26 is a personal website that should be replaced unless good credentials can be established for author (Ria Tan), and 54 and 56 are definitely fine for reliability (these are listings of who did what taxonomic name from ITIS). Sourcing could be improved, but the nomination statement seems to include some false positives on bad sources. Hog Farm _Talk 03:08, 5 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Move to FARC HF has done a great job analysing the sources mentioned in the FAR nomination, and while some are acceptable others are not (particularly ref 24, which is to a Facebook page of what appears to be a tour guide company?). Other references need proper formatting (like ref 77). I'm also concerned about the "Conservation" section, which uses lots of websites of organisations as sources: is there academic literature on the conservation status of this species? I did a JSTOR search of "Hawksbill sea turtle" and the amount of results I got were staggering, so I think there's academic literature that is missing from this article and should be examined before non-academic sources are used. (examples: Foraging Selectivity of the Hawksbill Sea Turtle (Eretmochelys imbricata) in the Culebra Archipelago, Puerto Rico, 2011, Efficient establishment of primary fibroblast cultures from the hawksbill sea turtle (Eretmochelys imbricata) and A multistate open robust design: population dynamics, reproductive effort, and phenology of sea turtles from tagging data.) Z1720 (talk) 21:18, 9 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Move to FARC, needed sourcing improvements have not occurred. Hog Farm _Talk 02:46, 11 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Move to FARC per above, no edits since 3 April. (t · c) buidhe 22:58, 11 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Move to FARC No improvements yet. OnlyFixingProse (talk) 08:23, 14 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

FARC section

Issues raised in the review section include sourcing and comprehensiveness. Nikkimaria (talk) 01:38, 16 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Delist no significant edits since FAR has been opened. Z1720 (talk) 15:58, 22 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Delist the issues are still present. (t · c) buidhe 16:28, 24 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Delist, issues unresolved. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 18:01, 25 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Delist. Casliber did some reorganization on April 16, but the sourcing issues are outstanding. Hog Farm _Talk 14:52, 27 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Closing note: This removal candidate has been delisted, but there may be a delay in bot processing of the close. Please leave the {{featured article review}} template in place on the talk page until the bot goes through. Nikkimaria (talk) 02:55, 30 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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