Talk:Galápagos tortoise/GA1

GA Review

Reading through the article, I'm going to fail the GA nomination. The article fails on a number of scores:

• The prose and grammar suffers from some poor areas and others that are quite awkward. Just a few examples include
  • "They have a very large shells (carapace) made of bone which is an integral part of the skeleton."
  • "On the wetter islands, the tortoises migrate down the gentle mountain slopes after the wet season to feed on the grass-covered plains and they climb back to feed on grasses of the mountain meadows in the dry season (the increased precipitation at that altitude keeps the grasses watered)"
  • "Clearly then, they are able to vocalise."
  • "This happens during aggressive encounters, whilst righting themselves if turned upside down and particularly males in mating ("rhythmic groans")"
  • "Lonesome George is the only known individual of the Pinta Island Tortoise"
  • "In contrast, the eggs are deposited randomly into cracks in rocky areas,."
  • "Contrarily, "The old ones seem generally to die from accidents, as from falling down precipices: at least, several of the inhabitants told me, that they never found one dead without some evident cause.""
  • "In the seventeenth century, pirates started to use Galápagos as resupply base,"
  • "Overall, 2500 individuals of a all breeds have been reintroduced to the islands."
• The article does not follow the correct layout. See WP:LAYOUT
• Correct dashes are not followed. See WP:DASH.
• Many of the sections are unreferenced.
• References should be placed directly after punctuation marks. See WP:CITE.
• Also see WP:CITE for how to correctly annotate references.
• Numerals less than ten should be spelt out. See WP:MOSNUM.

I would suggest getting a copy-edit or peer review before making a Good Article nomination. The main reason to fail it is the lack of references. But the prose would benefit from a fresh pair of eyes.

GA review (see here for criteria)

1. It is reasonably well written.

   a (prose): b (MoS):

2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.

   a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):

3. It is broad in its coverage.

   a (major aspects): b (focused):

4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.

   Fair representation without bias:

5. It is stable.

   No edit wars etc.:

6. It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate.

   a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):

7. Overall:

   Pass/Fail:

   Peanut4 (talk) 23:41, 5 August 2008 (UTC)