Talk:Lepas testudinata

Lepas testudinata 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.
Review: November 2, 2023. (Reviewed version).

A fact from Lepas testudinata appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know column on 4 December 2023 (check views). The text of the entry was as follows:

Did you know... that Lepas testudinata can form colonies of more than 1000 members at a time?

A record of the entry may be seen at Wikipedia:Recent additions/2023/December. The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Lepas testudinata.

Wikipedia

GA Review

Passed. Jens Lallensack (talk) 00:33, 2 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

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.

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

Reviewer: Jens Lallensack (talk · contribs) 23:35, 27 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Wow, such invertebrates are very rare at GAN, so I am happy to see it there! My comments follow below:

It's –> Its
Done

Article needs more wikilinks (species, endemic, kelp, instars, and more). Note that terms that were linked in the lead should be linked in the main text again.
Done

and often serves as a foundation species ecologically – I suggest to remove "ecologically" as it is not needed and does not read very well.
Done, reworded

genus Lapas – in italics
Done

The species was likely first described in 1834 – But the taxonbox states Aurivillius, 1892. Note that "first description" means the formal establishment of the name, and that is always unequivocal (or else the taxon would be technically invalid). Maybe you mean something in the lines of "first studied"?
Done, reworded to 'first observed'

In 1892, Carl Wilhelm Samuel Aurivillius classified the species as Lepas testudinata – did he actually re-assign the species, or did he name a separate taxon (which was later synonymised)?
Done

hadn't – had not; they've – they have; these are colloquial
Done

Foster also declared Lepas affinis (named by Lancelot Alexander Borradaile, 1916) a synonym as well – "also" and "as well" are redundant.
Done

Lepas testudinata have – "has", not "have", as you do elsewhere in the article.
Done

Lepas testudinata have two different peduncle (stalk) structures depending on – This is not well formulated (not clear what is dependent). Also, the reader will assume that a single individual has two peduncles that are different.
Done

under go – undergo
Done

Description: That all sounds very general, does it apply to all barnacles? What I really miss here is information specific to this species. How can I identify the species (distinguish it from related species)? This is important, it is what readers often look for.
Done, oh boy this took a bit. So, this is not a particularly popular species (obviously) and finding info was difficult. I managed to track down a good source that discusses some morphological details.

is a driving force – sounds not encyclopedic. "main factor"?
Done

Fiona pinnata predates Lepas – should be introduced "The sea slug Fiona pinnata" or something like that.
Done

Along with other species of Lepas barnicles, Lepas testudinata plays a major risk to biofouling damage – "poses a major rist of"?
Done

it is broadly distributed throughout the China Seas – that is contradictory, as this would be northern hemisphere, not southern as previously stated.
Done

More specifically, it is broadly distributed throughout the China Seas, Australian Sea, and the Indo-West Pacific – doesn't this contradict your earlier statement that it is a cosmopolit in the southern oceans?
Done

range is noncontinuous and is likely broken up by the – there must be a way to say this much more concisely.
Done

The species has not been evaluated by the IUCN Red List – The IUCN evaluates, not the list.
Done

based upon comparison of 18S gene – grammar --Jens Lallensack (talk) 23:35, 27 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Done

@Jens Lallensack: Thank you so much for reviewing this so quickly!! I am currently recovering from a Corneal cross-linking surgery so my vision isn't the best right now. I've still got one good eye but can't tolerate computer screens for more than 10-20 minutes at a time. It will probably take me a few days to fully respond to everything, but I don't see any issue with getting this done within the standard 7-day time frame. 🏵️Etrius ( Us) 00:08, 28 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I wish you all the best, and hope you will recover quickly! But do not worry about the time frame, the article will not run away (neither will I). Jens Lallensack (talk) 00:12, 28 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Jens Lallensack Thank you for being patient. I believe I've addressed everything. I apologize if there's any grammar amiss, trying to proof-read with one eye is... a challenge to say the least. 🏵️Etrius ( Us) 05:15, 31 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you! I did some copy edits, please check if these are ok.

We seem to miss a few more wikilinks (e.g., antero-lateral, mitochondrial)

Done, hopefully I got them all

A 2021 study in Marine Biology – I suggest to replace with author names, which is standard elsewhere and outside of Wikipedia. The journal is not really relevant.

Thanks!!!

among select members of the Lepas genus – "among selected members of the genus Lepas"?

Done

Foster concluded that Lepas elongata was synonymous – "is"

Done

Thanks for the anatomical details. But are these details specific for this species? If so, can we state that they are?

Not done, So there isn't much more out there. I found this and this source but I'd debate their reliability.

Jens Lallensack (talk) 00:30, 1 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Jens Lallensack Resolved. I really can't find much else out there for specific descriptions. If you have a source I've missed, I'd greatly appreciate you pointing me in that direction, 'cause otherwise I'm out of sources I can access. 🏵️Etrius ( Us) 05:00, 1 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry for being unclear; I was rather asking if the specific feature you just added is specific for the species, and if that could be clearly stated, e.g. with "Unlike in related forms" or similar. Jens Lallensack (talk) 10:59, 1 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Jens Lallensack, If I am understanding what you want correctly, you're asking for a physical trait that is specific to this species. I unfortunately don't think such a clarification is possible without WP:OR. 🏵️Etrius ( Us) 00:11, 2 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Fair enough, nothing we can do here, then. I will promote it now, congratulations! Jens Lallensack (talk) 00:30, 2 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

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.

Did you know nomination

The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was: promoted by Freedom4U talk 00:23, 28 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

(

Comment or view
Article history

)

... that Lepas testudinata can form colonies of over 1000 members at a time? Source: https://brill.com/view/journals/cr/84/5-6/article-p635_10.xml
- Reviewed: Template:Did you know nominations/Freddy Huayta

Improved to Good Article status by Etriusus (talk). Self-nominated at 17:45, 3 November 2023 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/Lepas testudinata; consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.[reply]

Article was nominated for DYK within seven days of passing GAR. Article is long enough, adequately cited, and neutrally written. QPQ has been completed. No pings on Earwigs for copyvio or close paraphrasing. Hook is interesting, cited, and short enough for DYK; AGF on paywalled source. Morgan695 (talk) 16:29, 9 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Is it a "duck barnacle" or a "goose barnacle?"

Why does the lead section describe this species as a "duck barnacle"? Jarble (talk) 17:20, 4 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Jarble reverted. Probably a good faith mistake but could've been a vandal. 🏵️Etrius ( Us) 05:50, 5 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Etriusus: The "duck barnacle" is another species (Lepas anatifera). Jarble (talk) 06:12, 5 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Jarble, huh, neat. Learn something new everyday. 🏵️Etrius ( Us) 17:10, 7 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]