Wikipedia

Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of mustelids/archive1

< Wikipedia:Featured list candidates
The following is an archived discussion of a featured list nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured list candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.

The list was promoted by Giants2008 via FACBot (talk) 00:25, 27 April 2020 (UTC) [1].[reply]

List of mustelids edit

List of mustelids (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Toolbox
Nominator(s): PresN 17:02, 3 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Third in my ongoing series of "animals in a family" (felids, canids), here is "List of mustelids", containing all of the animals in the Mustelidae family- otters, badgers, weasels, and more such long creatures with legs. It's a diverse set of animals, widely varied in size and habitat, and much bigger than the cat and dog families. The format is based on those other two lists, and like with canids I've included a section on prehistoric species; unlike with canids, there's no generally accepted authority on how to arrange the species, so I've gone with the Paleobiology Database's categorization, which is a bit messy but at least doesn't contradict itself. As always, thanks for reviewing! --PresN 17:02, 3 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Image review—pass
  • Hmm, unclear- the image was uploaded by the Internet Archive to Flickr as explicitly in the commons with permission from the rights holders, and it's taken from [2] - the image itself is not copyright that journal, but from the Canadian government, and it's unclear how old it is (the sea mink went extinct 125 years ago). --PresN 17:01, 5 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Well, maybe it is from pre-1970 and Canadian crown copyright has expired? I suppose Internet Archive can be trusted. buidhe 23:12, 5 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I used it on sea mink which is an FA, so it's fine   User:Dunkleosteus77 |push to talk  02:38, 7 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Likely, dropped. --PresN 17:01, 5 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Other images appear to be free. buidhe 05:36, 5 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • 17-cm and 1.8-meter need hyphens
  • Not seeing any other issues at first look, great work! Reywas92Talk 20:45, 6 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • @Reywas92: Half-right, it turns out: MOS:HYPHEN - Values and units used as compound modifiers are hyphenated only where the unit is given as a whole word; when using the unit symbol, separate it from the number with a non-breaking space ( ). So, 17 cm, but 1.8-meter. --PresN 22:01, 6 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • @Reywas92: Anything else? --PresN 17:00, 21 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Looks great, so many cute little guys in this family! Reywas92Talk 17:48, 21 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Dunkleosteus77 edit

  • I'd never heard of doing this, but in talking to other editors it seems it's a frequent interpretation of MOS:CONFORM in the biology space, so, done.
  • Instead of having "Population figures rounded to the nearest hundred. Population trends as described by the International Union for Conservation of Nature" as a note and using it a bunch of times, you could just put that into Conventions, and you already cite the IUCN after every population trend, so you don't really need to declare that   User:Dunkleosteus77 |push to talk  02:44, 7 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Done.
  • Done.
  • Maybe you could put notes for more specific population details given by the IUCN. For example, for the giant otter, there are some population estimates for specific regions (like 2,000–5,000 in the Pantanal)   User:Dunkleosteus77 |push to talk  02:53, 7 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • I'd prefer not to, for a couple reasons: for one, the data is very uneven between species, which limits how useful a comparison table is; mostly, however, it's because without context the subpopulation figures aren't meaningful- in the example you give, is the Pantanal a region in which the Giant Otter is mostly found? Is it just one small area? There's no way to know, and most of the numbers would be that way- an animal with a population of a million might only have a firm number of 2,000 on one island, or I might have an estimate for one country without any indication of how representative that is (for example, the raccoon is found in North America, but there's an introduced population in Germany, but that's the only place I've found a population number for; does knowing that there's 1 million raccoons in Germany tell you anything about the global population count?). It's possible to give these contexts sometimes, but it quickly becomes too much text for this kind of list, and is better kept to the animal's article.
@Dunkleosteus77: Done, replied inline. --PresN 17:07, 7 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
You don't have to ping me by the way, I'm watching the page (also whenever I get a ping I always get worried that I did something wrong)   User:Dunkleosteus77 |push to talk  18:56, 8 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Added to captions, though I'd like to come back later and make range maps that don't have those subspecies divides. --PresN 22:03, 11 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Inconsistent showing/hiding of subspecies lists (for example, the European pine marten defaults to closed, but the Japanese marten defaults to open)   User:Dunkleosteus77 |push to talk  18:56, 8 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • It's purposeful; they're only hidden if it's long enough to stretch the box vertically when opened (given normal image sizes), which means 5 and fewer are shown by default. --PresN 22:03, 11 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • At the size of the current image in the lead, that image is unparseable- the words are not close to readable, and the animals are about the size of the text "xxxx", and not really identifiable. It's a useful image, but I'd rather not use it in this space. --PresN 22:03, 11 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Thank you, not sure how I missed that. Fixed. --PresN 04:26, 21 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Fixed, missing the 'File:'. --PresN 16:59, 21 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Chidgk1 edit

  • "went extinct in 1894" sounds a bit passive. How about "was hunted to extinction in 1894" or "was hunted to extinction before the 20th century" or "had been hunted to extinction by the end of the 19th century"
  • Support: as I trust you to consider and if necessary fix the following minor points:
  • Done
  • Do we need all the "consisting of" and "containing" in the lead? Or could the sentences be something like: "The 23 genera and 59 species of Mustelidae are split into 8 subfamilies: Guloninae, martens and wolverines; Helictidinae, ferret-badgers; Ictonychinae, African polecats and grisons; Lutrinae, or otters; Melinae, Eurasian badgers; Mellivorinae, currently only the honey badger; Mustelinae, weasels and minks; and Taxidiinae, currently only the American badger. Three former subfamilies are now extinct: Leptarctinae, Mustelavinae, and Oligobuninae."?
  • Done
  • Canids are mentioned in "conventions" - perhaps a leftover from a previous article
  • Whoops, done
  • Hunting: "preys on fruits" and other things which are not live animals sounds strange.
  • It's a little odd, yeah, but none of these species are herbivorous, so they all have an animal type they "prey on" in addition to any plants; if fruit or similar comes first it's because the prey types are in order of amount, if possible
  • some of the "Europe" headings are for maps which also include parts of Asia
  • Fixed
  • a pity not all the weasels have pics
  • It really is, but nothing I can do about it, as I'm stuck with free-use images- the Amazon weasel and Malayan weasel are very poorly studied, the Indonesian mountain weasel, Colombian weasel, and Bornean ferret-badger have tiny and remote ranges, and the Vietnam ferret-badger has literally only 2 specimens ever recorded. --PresN 04:14, 27 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by Dudley edit

  • Why are some families shown as having "currently only" one species? It sounds to me a bit odd as if another species could evolve tomorrow. I take that you mean that there are other extinct genera, but the same applies to other families.
  • Why is American badger not linked? I see it goes to the same link as Taxidiinae, but so do Mellivorinae and honey badger, and they are both linked. Why is grison not linked? The choice of what to link seems unclear.
  • There is an error message: "date= / |doi= mismatch" on refs 15, 21, 25, 58, 101
  • A first rate list. Just a few niggles. Dudley Miles (talk) 22:52, 27 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Dudley Miles: Removed the "currently"s, went ahead and linked species/group names that redirect, and fixed the doi mismatch errors. --PresN 17:04, 7 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support. Dudley Miles (talk) 17:54, 7 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Comments from ChrisTheDude edit

Resolved comments from ChrisTheDude (talk) 18:52, 7 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
*"In addition to the extant subfamilies, Mustelidae comprises three extinct subfamilies" => "In addition to the extant subfamilies, Mustelidae includes three extinct subfamilies" ("comprises" means "consists entirely of")
  • Don't think the image caption should start with a digit, is it possible to re-word?
  • What's the source for the block of text above the table (I'm thinking mainly of the bit about proposals being disputed)?
  • "Diet: Primarily eats fruits" - I am presuming the plural here is standard AmEng? I am British and we would say "Primarily eats fruit", but then we are odd ;-)
  • ....although having said that I notice you say "Primarily eats rodents and small mammals, as well as birds, insects, fruit...." further down
  • Think that's it from me :-) -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 18:57, 6 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • @ChrisTheDude: Fixed, reworded, changed fruits to fruit (it's valid as it's multiple types of fruit, but inconsistent), and added sources for the example proposals not included. Thanks! --PresN 17:39, 7 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@WP:FLC director and delegates: Note that I cannot promote this list, as it is mine. --PresN 17:55, 11 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Resolved comments from The Rambling Man (Stay indoors, stay safe ) 20:16, 14 April 2020 (UTC)
Comments I'll promote but my thoughts first:
  • "extant and extinct mammals." you already said "mammals" so what about "genera"?
  • Done.
  • Australia I thought was the country and Australasia was the continent?
  • Why no map of Vietnam?
  • The Vietnam ferret-badger is found "in" Vietnam, but its range is completely unknown, as only two specimens have ever been found (since 2011); the most that we can say is that it's found "in Vietnam". I can't make a map of where the species is found, there's just no data.
  • I think our MOS recommends against collapsing collapsible lists by default...
  • It's a little ambiguous for cases like this, and it's awkward not to for species like the 42-subspecies Long-tailed weasel- the row gets really stretched. I have verified that the content is viewable on mobile, which is the main thrust of MOS:COLLAPSE.
  • "Japan (native range in blue, introduced in red)" is this accessible to people who can't distinguish those colours? There's more than one of these...
  • Added explanatory text to make up for it, though I'd prefer to make all the images consistent and remove that information altogether.
  • The "Prehistoric mustelids" list goes on an awful long way. Any chance of using div col, perhaps section by section, to maximise the width usage?
  • It was in two columns; changing to fixed-width columns with the images as a gallery at the bottom, which seems to make it much shorter on my screen.

The Rambling Man (Stay indoors, stay safe!!!!) 18:22, 11 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@The Rambling Man: Responded inline. --PresN 03:15, 12 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Source review – The reliability and formatting of the references both look fine, and the link-checker shows no issues. The sourcing looks good overall. Giants2008 (Talk) 23:18, 14 April 2020 (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_list_candidates/List_of_mustelids/archive1&oldid=953356970"