Talk:Fork-tailed drongo/GA2

GA Review

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch

Reviewer: Chiswick Chap (talk · contribs) 15:29, 9 March 2024 (UTC)

Comments

• "Described by Johann Matthäus Bechstein in 1794." -- isn't a sentence: please begin with the full name, i.e. "The fork-tailed drongo was described by ..."

•  Done

• What does "genetically highly structured" mean?

• It means that they are genetically heterogeneous, that is, their populations differ substancially genetically.

• OK, I've tweaked the text to that effect.  Done

• The citation to Bechstein 1794 needs to be provided at the end of that sentence.

•  Done

• You say 4 races are accepted, then list 6 subspecies? The following two sentences seem to equate "race" with "subspecies".

• Only very recently that two other subspecies were recognized thus the "usually accepted". Race and subspecies can be synonyms.  Done

• "The races ... (Hartlaub, 1849)." is uncited.

•  Done

• [11] Herremans is used curiously to support a claim of leucism, but the paper is in fact a challenge to the kleptoparasitism theory which is presented using other sources as if it were a definite fact. 'Kleptoparasitism' needs to be presented in a balanced way (you might like to use sub-sections named 'Evidence for' and 'Evidence against', perhaps) with evidence in favour ([18], [19] etc) and evidence against, including [11] Herremans; I note that the account based on [20] Flower and indeed the fact that only 29% of their time is spent trailing [21][22] all support the view that the species is an opportunistic kleptoparasite, spending most of its time foraging for itself, so there are multiple 'Against' sources to hand already.

• The source isn't disputing the kleptoparasitic tactic of the drongo, but instead suggestion that it might not be used as much as we think; only in situations of scarity of food. I will add a sentence saying something along the lines. Tell me if that's enough.

• Definitely getting there. I think the 29% of the time spent trailing (refs) should be mentioned, so we should use the word "opportunistic" about the kleptoparasitism to make the argument clear. I've listed the sources already.

• I've added another sentence with the above source, let me know what you think!

• OK!  Done

• The last paragraph of 'Kleptoparasitism' touches on 'theory of mind' which could be considered off-topic: you need to explain (as [13] Flower and other sources do) that the bird uses its theory of mind ability (if it has such a thing) to support its kleptoparasitism.

•  Done

• I'm not sure I get what the last sentence in 'Kleptoparasitism' is saying; I think you need to go back to [22] Baigrie and explain from there how the bird's behaviour contributes to its kleptoparasitism.

• Rephrased,  Done

• Thanks.

• "close to wetlands, forests, and farms": these are rather different habitats (in many ways), so you should explain how all 3 of them can be "favorable".

  I'm afraid the sources don't go deeper than simply listing the habitats.

• "a diverse array of colors and patterns, serving as a unique signature," --- no, the diversity serves to provide a multiplicity of unique signatures, making mimicry more difficult, which is almost the opposite of what is said in the text.

  Removed the unique signature part.

Minor

• "The fork-tailed drongo is ... [singular] ... These insect-eating birds are ... [plural] ... Its range was ... (singular)" -- please choose a number (singular, plural) and stick with it. Same goes for 'Description' and 'Conservation status'; if you go for singular, you might also consider making the 'Behavior' text singular.

•  Done

• "accepted. Though as of 2023" -> "accepted, though as of 2023"

•  Done

• "Red List. Though" -> "Red List, though"

•  Done

• "subspecie", "specie" -- both words end in "s".

•  Done

• I've fixed a couple of minor things in the text.

Images

• All the images are plausibly licensed on Commons.

• We are missing images of drongo eggs of different colors and patterns, and indeed of mimicking eggs laid by cuckoos. Ideally we'd have both together in a nest, of course. I guess if all else fails we could have a pic of an African cuckoo adult, but that'd not be nearly as good.

  Couldn't find any image that was freely licensed.

• Can we have a distribution map of the races please. These aren't hard to draw and there are plenty of blank base maps on Commons.

  I can perhaps do a distribution map of the species as a whole, there isn't enough information about the specific ranges of the races.

Sources

• [2] Bowie - not found.

• Substituted with a valid link.

• The new [2] Rocamora 2016 is an old version of [16] Rocamora 2020, please merge: use the newer edition for both purposes.

•  Done

• [10] Dowsett needs chapter or page number.

• I'm afraid I no longer have access to the book, I will just remove it since there are more sources supporting it.

• [12] and [13] and [18] Flower are the same, please merge.

   Done

• Earwig finds no issues.

Summary

• Interesting little article on a familiar bird. There are a few issues that definitely need to be fixed before we get to GA but they shouldn't take too long. Chiswick Chap (talk) 16:10, 9 March 2024 (UTC)

• I tried to fix the problem you raised by changing to an article history template but the bot tagged the review as failed. The Blue Rider 11:48, 10 March 2024 (UTC)

• Ah, it needed to be done before the GAN started then. Never mind, it'll all work ok now. Chiswick Chap (talk) 12:02, 10 March 2024 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.