Talk:Banded houndshark

Banded houndshark has been listed as one of the Natural sciences good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.

Article milestones
Date	Process	Result
May 17, 2011	Good article nominee	Listed

Fishes Low‑importance

	Fish portal This article is part of WikiProject Fishes, an attempt to organise a detailed guide to all topics related to Fish taxa. To participate, you can edit the attached article, or contribute further at WikiProject Fishes. This project is an offshoot of the WikiProject Tree of Life.FishesWikipedia:WikiProject FishesTemplate:WikiProject FishesFishes articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Sharks Low‑importance

	Sharks portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Sharks, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of sharks on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.SharksWikipedia:WikiProject SharksTemplate:WikiProject Sharksshark articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Copyright problem removed

This article was based on the corresponding article at fishbase.org or niwascience.co.naz, neither of which are compatibly licensed for Wikipedia. It has been revised on this date as part of a large-scale project to remove infringement from these sources. Earlier text must not be restored, unless it can be verified to be free of infringement. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material; such additions will be deleted. Contributors may use external websites as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences or phrases. Accordingly, the material may be rewritten, but only if it does not infringe on the copyright of the original or plagiarize from that source. Please see our guideline on non-free text for how to properly implement limited quotations of copyrighted text. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously, and persistent violators will be blocked from editing. While we appreciate contributions, we must require all contributors to understand and comply with these policies. (For background on this situation, please see the related administrator's noticeboard discussion and the cleanup task force subpage.) Thank you. --– Sadalmelik ☎ 18:56, 25 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Banded houndshark/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Ucucha 01:09, 15 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Does Hemigaleus pingi merit a mention in the text?

It's not commented upon in the sources I have.

The IUCN references Compagno (1979, 1984), but does not give the full references; do you have those papers? Ucucha 09:28, 17 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Compagno (1984) doesn't comment on it except to give the synonymy. Compagno (1979) is a thesis and thus I don't have access.

"Southern Russia" to me suggests the Caucasus region; perhaps it would be clearer to say "the southern part of the Russian Far East" or something like that.

Changed to "southern Russian Far East"

Has it also been bred in captivity?

Yes; info added.

Otherwise, looking good, and the concerns above are all quite minor. Ucucha 01:09, 15 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Also, the links to conger eel and eelgrass lead to dab pages and the link to http://ci.nii.ac.jp/naid/40016230011/%7D%7D is dead. Ucucha 01:11, 15 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Fixed.

Let me know of further issues. -- Yzx (talk) 01:57, 15 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, and sorry for the delay. As the issue with the synonymy does not affect the GA criteria, I'll pass the article now. Ucucha 09:28, 17 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the review. -- Yzx (talk) 17:21, 17 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Endangered or "not diminished"?

"Because fishing does not appear to have diminished this shark's population, the International Union for Conservation of Nature has listed it under Endangered." makes no sense as written. If not diminished, not endangered. May also be obsolete - last assessed in 2019. 50.47.151.13 (talk) 06:08, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]