Talk:Grey currawong/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Ucucha 14:44, 22 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I will review in detail later, but some things:–

~~Lead could be a bit longer~~

have buffed lead Casliber (talk · contribs) 06:03, 23 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

~~Why are some refs missing the article title?~~

Sometimes, if using a secondary source (like Higgins), where there is a specific source identifying a specific fact, I'll use the specific one - however I was unable to find and view the originals in these cases and Higgins often leaves out the names of the article. I have reverted to the secondary source. Casliber (talk · contribs) 21:36, 24 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

~~A few very short, stubby paragraphs.~~

working on that - two to go Casliber (talk · contribs) 21:35, 23 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Ucucha 14:44, 22 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

~~Lead: add where nominate ssp lives~~

done Casliber (talk · contribs) 20:28, 26 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

~~Perhaps add something about voice and breeding to the lead~~

both mentioned in lead now Casliber (talk · contribs) 20:38, 26 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

~~I think you could do without some of the comparisons to the Pied Currawong in the lead.~~

done Casliber (talk · contribs) 20:28, 26 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

~~"Grey- or Leaden Crow-shrike"—is this short for Grey Cow-shrike or Leaden Cow-shrike or for Grey-shrike or Leaden Crow-shrike? If the latter, the hyphen shouldn't be there.~~

it is the former (i.e. Grey Cow-shrike) Casliber (talk · contribs) 20:25, 26 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

~~Why did Sibley and Ahlquist use a tribe (Cracticini) when Artamidae has only two subfamilies?~~

~~Good point! will look into it~~ ~~Casliber (talk · contribs) 20:25, 26 April 2010 (UTC)~~ aha, because they had a very broad circumscription of the family Corvidae and placed the two as a group within another subfamily corvinae. These families have all been split off now, so cracticini was elevated artamidae (and artamidae takes precendence over cracticidae as it is about 100 years older) Casliber (talk · contribs) 20:42, 26 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

~~"a specimen from Central Australia"—can the location be more concrete than that?~~

done Casliber (talk · contribs) 20:32, 26 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

"one bird was observed impaling a rodent"—any chance you know what rodent it was?

Hah, I should have known you'd ask that. I'll take a look to see what can be added Casliber (talk · contribs) 20:23, 26 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

~~"It was also a common casualty of collisions with vehicles."—sounds very artificial~~
"purple-, grey- or blue-tinged brown"—WP:HYPHEN discourages (but does not prohibit) these "hanging hyphens"

I think they are necessary to avoid repetition as in "purple-tinged, grey-tinged or blue-tinged brown", i am open to other suggestions though. Casliber (talk · contribs) 20:23, 26 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

That's what the MOS recommends. I agree that this looks better though, but you may get someone upset about it at the FAC. Ucucha 20:43, 26 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Images look good. Perhaps put one of those now under the subspecies list in the taxobox, as the taxobox image is not nearly as clear as those.

I am waiting on some more OTRS permissions too. I asked a bird discussion group to get some and some helpful folks obliged. Will have a juggle Casliber (talk · contribs) 20:23, 26 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It's good enough for GA in any case, but if you could get more pictures, that would of course be even better. Ucucha 20:43, 26 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Sources all look reliable. Did you get all good sources from the list I sent you?

That list was good and there was some useful stuff. Funnily enough one of the pied currawong ones a few months ago was acutally for this one :) Casliber (talk · contribs) 20:23, 26 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Ucucha 17:13, 26 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I am now passing this as a GA, as nothing that's still open has any bearing on the GA criteria. They may be helpful for FAC, though. One more question: do we know which two species of currawongs are most closely related? Ucucha 20:50, 26 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Yes - the Black Currawong (of Tasmania) was considered a subspecies of the Pied (of Mainland Oz), but was split in recent years (after being considered a separate species early on). Given that, I find it odd that the distinctive Clinking subspecies (which theoretically must have been separated for the same amount of time as the Black from its mainland relative the Grey Currawong) is still considered only a subspecies, but time will tell. As far as I can make out, there has been no molecular work on the genus to date (which would be interesting given all the variables of plumage which occur - you have grey forms at either end of the continent, with a large sooty form on Tas, and a small sooty form on Kangaroo Island, and intermediate forms with unusual black wings in the middle) Casliber (talk · contribs) 00:02, 27 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]