Shortfin mako shark edit
- A script has been used to generate a semi-automated review of the article for issues relating to grammar and house style; it can be found on the automated peer review page for November 2008.
This peer review discussion has been closed.
I've listed this article for peer review because… I am interested in improving the article to obtain GA status. Any help to move the article along would be grealty appreciated.
Thanks, Duckhunter92 (talk) 00:46, 19 November 2008 (UTC)
I removed the semi-automated peer review (SAPR) because it should not be included here for the following reasons: 1) when the SAPR is included here, this peer review request does not show up at WP:PR for others to see it and make comments; 2) this saves space at WP:PR; and 3) this follows the directions above, i.e. "Please do not ... paste in semi-automated peer reviews below: link to them instead." Thanks, Ruhrfisch ><>°° 02:16, 20 November 2008 (UTC)
- I think you should add taxonomy information, like other species in the genus? subspecies? I know the authority is in the taxobox but I think it would be good to have it in the article too, maybe with a few lines on how the species was found. I always try to put the etymology of the scientific name, you might be able to find that. Finally it is always useful to compare with other good/featured articles in the subject or simply about a species. (E.g. Oceanic whitetip shark). Pro bug catcher (talk • contribs). 19:55, 25 November 2008 (UTC)