Talk:Chinese nuthatch

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Jens Lallensack (talk · contribs) 19:55, 14 January 2022 (UTC)

Happy to review. Looks good on first sight. Comments soon. --Jens Lallensack (talk) 19:55, 14 January 2022 (UTC)

• is distinguished by its very black calotte – is "calotte" really the correct term? Seems to be restricted to humans.

Replaced into crown

• while that of the female is the same color as the back, – Be specific about the color? "is the same blue-grey as the back"?

Replaced

• "couple" -> in animals, those are called "pairs"

Replaced

• which is found several thousand kilometers away on the Mediterranean island, – that doesn't really work here, I suggest to remove

Removed

• who also cited it as Sitta pekinensis in 1867 – "who also referred to it as"?

Replaced

• Verreaux describes – don't switch tense

Replaced

• it the name "villosa", – the specific name "villosa"

Replaced

• 1975-1982 – use the ndash (–), the long line

Replaced

• described in 1929 by the German ornithologist Erwin Stresemann of a specimen – "based on a specimen"

Replaced

• and originally described as a subspecies of the red-breasted nuthatch – ", originally as a subspecies of …"

Replaced

• This subspecies lives in central China,[7] in central Gansu and Qinghai – "is distributed over"; dot missing

Replaced

• (J. Verreaux, 1865), – Inconsistent: Initial (here: J.) shouldn't be there?

Removed

• a subspecies described in – you already said these are subspecies, no need to repeat

Removed

• It lives from South-East Siberia, and in North-Central and North-East China to Korea. – "It ranges from South-East Siberia to North-Central and North-East China and Korea"

Replaced

• Tip: Check featured bird articles (Wikipedia:Featured articles) to see how they formulate things, you can learn a lot.
• described by the Scottish ornithologist William Robert Ogilvie-Grant, from material from 180 km (110 mi) southeast of Seoul. – no ","

Removed

• which are also those of what is sometimes treated as the subgenus Micrositta: – "which are also those that comprise the subgenus Micrositta"?

Replaced

• these three species forming the sister group – "form"

Replaced

• link "conspecific", "sister group", "clade"?

Linked

• which was found to be the most basal of the species – of the species, or of the canadensis group?

Replaced into "which was found to be the most basal species of the group"

• The phylogeny established, – "With its phylogeny established"?

Replaced

• appears more than five million years ago – "appears to have occurred more than …"

Replaced

• when the clade of krueperi and ledanti settles in the – "when the common ancestor of krueperi and ledanti entered the"?

Replaced

• the two species constituting it diverge 1.75 million years ago – remove "constituting it", and keep tense ("diverged")

Removed and renamed

• with populations leaving Asia from the east – do you possibly mean "for the east"?

Replaced

• First paragraph of "Plumage and measurements" goes into extreme details and is impossible to read. Maybe move the details into a footnote?

Moved

• More later. --Jens Lallensack (talk) 20:40, 14 January 2022 (UTC)
• Sitta canadensis – link (and give common name) at first mention)

I ended up removing and replaced it only into common name. Didn't linked also as it was already linked on its first mention. 2001:4455:1A9:E100:D855:CA3:25C0:3CCE (talk) 02:40, 16 January 2022 (UTC)

• Gansu and Qinghai – lacks a source?

I just ended up removing since it already said "in central China".

• The cladogram has two separate headings which are redundant. Maybe no heading is needed at all, since the last sentence of the paragraph already introduces the study. Just add a ":"

This? [1] 2001:4455:1A9:E100:D855:CA3:25C0:3CCE (talk) 00:36, 16 January 2022 (UTC)

• appears to have occurred more than, – more than what? I don't understand.

I completely missed this. Added "five million years ago"

• Maybe use a single-column footnote style?

Done [2]

• 11.3 pounds (5,100 g) – should be switched (SI units are the primary units)

Fixed [3] 2001:4455:1A9:E100:D855:CA3:25C0:3CCE (talk) 01:17, 16 January 2022 (UTC)

• "crown" is now the right term, but linked to the wrong article (about skulls, i.e. bone). Best link to the birdgloss.

Linked differently

• You often use the words "rather" and "quite", but they don't say much and may be considered bloat; I would reduce them.

Removed

• first by the forehead, to finish more or less washed with black-soot. – I can't follow here.

Reworded it

• eyebrow – do you mean supercilium or is this something else?

Supercilium, replaced.

• with notably the scapulars less vivid, – "notably with the scapulars less vivid"

Replaced

• Sitta villosa villosa (Verreaux, 1865), described in 1865 by Jules Verreaux – state that this is the nominate subspecies (since you use this technical term often later). Also, I think the nominate subspecies should be the first in the list?

Stated and switched

• In subspecies – "In the subspecies"

Replaced

• with the male having orange-cinnamon underparts and the female buff-cinnamon, dull. – "with the male having orange-cinnamon and the female dull buff-cinnamon and dull underparts"

Replaced

• in being paler, grayish and smaller. – "more grayish"?

Replaced 2001:4455:1A9:E100:D855:CA3:25C0:3CCE (talk) 00:35, 16 January 2022 (UTC)

• Subspecies S. v. corea is often likened to the nominate subspecies more grayish. – I don't understand this, does it perhaps mean "The subspecies S. v. corea is more grayish than the nominate subspecies"?
  • Ah, based on my previous comment, did you perhaps mean "The subspecies S. v. corea is paler, more grayish, and smaller than the nominate subspecies"? I'm not sure if I'm interpreting this correctly, please check.
    • I double checked at the source and it definitely says corea being "paler" and "smaller". Reworded now. 2001:4455:1A9:E100:4500:3558:80A3:A58B (talk) 22:00, 16 January 2022 (UTC)
• subcaudals – this seems to be the correct term. But what does it mean, the region below the tail? If possible, add a link or an explanation in a bracket, otherwise readers will not understand.

Replaced it instead into "undertail coverts"

• ocular feature – what is this?

Reworded

• These calls are produced individually or in irregular series spaced from 0.3 to one second apart, when the bird is agitated or excited. – To what does the "when" relate to? Does he produce all these calls when agitated, or does he produce the irregular series when agitated?

Reworded

• longer or shorter and more or less regular series – Not sure what this means: longer or shorter? Longer/shorter than what?

Reworded

• this type of notes – notes? Do you mean "calls" here?

Replaced

• I didn't have much time today, will try to get the rest done tomorrow. --Jens Lallensack (talk) 19:54, 16 January 2022 (UTC)

No worries, and thanks for the reviews again. 2001:4455:1A9:E100:4500:3558:80A3:A58B (talk) 22:27, 16 January 2022 (UTC)

• This type of song is variable, and can become more rattling, with twelve units per second, duiduiduidui..., as some red-breasted nuthatches can do, but softer and higher pitched. – I'm not sure how to improve this sentence, but it becomes not clear how the separate parts of the sentence are related to each other. Twelfe units per second does only refer to the "rattling"?

Reworded properly — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2001:4455:1A9:E100:E85E:2218:7628:4FB9 (talk) 23:04, 19 January 2022 (UTC)

• and these invertebrates are also the sole source of food for the young. – My suggestion would be "which are also the sole source of food for the young"

Replaced

• neuroptera (Neuroptera) – either "Neuroptera" or "net-winged insects". "Neuropterans" is possible as well. Please check other clades in that sentence as well.

Removed duplications

• part in mixed-species foraging flock – "flocks"?

Replaced

• takes place in late April to early May. – "from"

Replaced

• The entrance to the nest – "Nest entrance"?

Replaced

• bricked up – I believe only humans can do brickwork.

Reworded

• The egg-laying has four to nine eggs - usually five or six - white – use ndash (–)

Replaced

• Both partners build the nest during seven to eight days, – "within"?

Replaced

• bowl from plant fibers, feathers, grasses. – "and grasses"?

Replaced

• The egg-laying has four to nine eggs – doesn't work. "The female lays four to nine eggs"?

Replaced

• white marked with reddish-brown – doesn't connect with sentence

Reworded. Perhaps "eggs white, marked with reddish-brown ..." is now.

• emerge from the egg – "hatch"

Replaced

• and raise only one flock in a year. – wrong term, should be "brood" -

Replaced

-Jens Lallensack (talk) 17:32, 19 January 2022 (UTC)

• may only be erratic there – I suggest "may only be a vagrant there", to have the proper term and linked article.

Replaced

• Another part of the range begins in southern Liaoning, – that sounds as if both parts would be disconnected, which is not the case? I don't see separate parts on the map.

Reworded entire sentence

• to be only erratic species in South Korea[16] or wintering; – why "or"? What does the source say?

Reworded entire sentence

• near the meeting point of China, –"meeting point"?

Reworded

• Larix sp. – sp. cannot be in italics

Removed

• the female without, – without what?

Black crown, added

• and add that – keep tense

Replaced — Preceding unsigned comment added by 180.194.127.148 (talk) 23:10, 20 January 2022 (UTC)

• From that moment on, the identity of the bird nicknamed "Altai nuthatch", then requires focused research. – This does not work, but I'm not sure what the intention was here.

Reworded

• or possibly if it is smudged with charcoal – I don't understand this.

Unlike other sources, I can't access this one. Perhaps "or possibly if it is soiled with coal" is fine?

Here [4] it is, you should be able to download it? --Jens Lallensack (talk) 07:29, 21 January 2022 (UTC)

I can access, but it looks like this source is different. Sucks that this [5] is unable to be downloaded. If the source would be nowhere to find, I think its safe to remove it perhaps? 180.194.127.148 (talk) 07:52, 21 January 2022 (UTC)

That's weird, the link is dynamic and changes. I can open the right one if I go [6] and click the first in the list. Does that work for you? --Jens Lallensack (talk) 09:49, 21 January 2022 (UTC)

Going for google scholar actually works somehow, got it and done rewording. Thanks for helping. 180.194.127.148 (talk) 11:05, 21 January 2022 (UTC)

Note: Finally through, there were more translation errors than I had anticipated. It generally helps a lot to read the sources while translating, and to see how bird FAs (like Eurasian nuthatch) formulate things. --Jens Lallensack (talk) 18:14, 20 January 2022 (UTC)