Talk:Mascarene parrot/GA1
GA Review
[edit]| GA toolbox |
|---|
| Reviewing |
Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch
Reviewer: Yzx (talk · contribs) 06:41, 4 June 2013 (UTC)
Alright, I'll give this a shot. Comments to follow. -- Yzx (talk) 06:41, 4 June 2013 (UTC)
Images: File:Mascarinus mascarinus.jpg, File:Mascarinus.jpg, File:Mascarinus.png need additional US license tags
- Added to all PD images. FunkMonk (talk) 08:39, 4 June 2013 (UTC)
- Sources:
Linnaeus, C. (1771). Mantissa plantarum. Regni Animalis Appendix (in In Latin). p. 524. -- extra "in", also, does this have a publisher?
- Fixed both. FunkMonk (talk) 09:13, 4 June 2013 (UTC)
Hume & Walters doesn't have location and the other book sources do
- Fixed, London. FunkMonk (talk) 09:07, 4 June 2013 (UTC)
Maybe note whether the taxobox image was based on life or taxidermy accounts
- It is not known for any of the images, actually. My guess is it is a dead specimen, but it wasn't stated in the original publication. FunkMonk (talk) 08:46, 4 June 2013 (UTC)
The Mascarene Parrot was first mentioned in 1674 -- in science? In Western literature?
- In Dubois' travelog. Clearer? FunkMonk (talk) 09:04, 4 June 2013 (UTC)
and the name is a reference to Pedro Mascarenhas, who discovered the Mascarene Islands -- I realize the islands were named after the person, but the body text says that the bird was named after the islands
- Ah, yeah, my mistake. FunkMonk (talk) 08:47, 4 June 2013 (UTC)
and when combined with the earlier specific name by Tommaso Salvadori in 1891 -- I don't understand; I thought Linnaeus originated the name?
- Yes, Salvadori only made the new combination, I'll try to reword it. FunkMonk (talk) 08:59, 4 June 2013 (UTC)
Why did some authors think it was a coracopsine? Also, am I interpreting correctly that this hypothesis is no longer favored in modern sources?
- Genetic data supports it, morphological data does not. I think the early authors classified it as such because of its dark colouration, but I haven't found a source that specifically states this. I'll take a more thorough look. FunkMonk (talk) 09:15, 4 June 2013 (UTC)
- Here's the original referral[1], I'll see if I can crunch through the Latin text... FunkMonk (talk) 09:24, 4 June 2013 (UTC)
- Now added, some features are not unique to the Coracopsis parrots, such as naked skin near the base of the beak, but the dark ("raven") plumage is, so added that. FunkMonk (talk) 09:41, 4 June 2013 (UTC)
- Here's the original referral[1], I'll see if I can crunch through the Latin text... FunkMonk (talk) 09:24, 4 June 2013 (UTC)
- Genetic data supports it, morphological data does not. I think the early authors classified it as such because of its dark colouration, but I haven't found a source that specifically states this. I'll take a more thorough look. FunkMonk (talk) 09:15, 4 June 2013 (UTC)
Hume supports -- "supported"?
- Fixed. FunkMonk (talk) 08:55, 4 June 2013 (UTC)
I'm not getting why the discussion of flightlessness is there, since the Mascarene Parrot wasn't flightless
- It is because if the bird was flightless, it would had been wiped out by the erupting vulcano. So the fact that it isn't flightless might indicate its ancestors arrived after the eruption, or that it is one of the few species to survive the event. A bit convoluted, but so is the source, which was published before the genetic data... FunkMonk (talk) 08:52, 4 June 2013 (UTC)
- Perhaps the paragraph would be clearer if it started off talking about the two hypotheses for the Marscarene Parrot (evolved before/survived volcanic eruption vs colonized island after), and maybe remove the talk about flightlessness altogether, as since the bird was obviously not flightless I'm not sure how it adds anything to the line of reasoning. -- Yzx (talk) 19:32, 4 June 2013 (UTC)
- Changed, how does it look? FunkMonk (talk) 06:52, 5 June 2013 (UTC)
- Much clearer. -- Yzx (talk) 00:40, 6 June 2013 (UTC)
- Changed, how does it look? FunkMonk (talk) 06:52, 5 June 2013 (UTC)
- Perhaps the paragraph would be clearer if it started off talking about the two hypotheses for the Marscarene Parrot (evolved before/survived volcanic eruption vs colonized island after), and maybe remove the talk about flightlessness altogether, as since the bird was obviously not flightless I'm not sure how it adds anything to the line of reasoning. -- Yzx (talk) 19:32, 4 June 2013 (UTC)
- It is because if the bird was flightless, it would had been wiped out by the erupting vulcano. So the fact that it isn't flightless might indicate its ancestors arrived after the eruption, or that it is one of the few species to survive the event. A bit convoluted, but so is the source, which was published before the genetic data... FunkMonk (talk) 08:52, 4 June 2013 (UTC)
Mauduyt -- first name?
- Sources don't state it, so I guess it is unknown, same with Feuilly, who the sources specifically state is only known by his last name. FunkMonk (talk) 08:57, 4 June 2013 (UTC)
The only Réunion species that disappeared after the Mascarene Parrot-- I assume this is bird species, since List of extinct animals of Réunion says the Flying Fox survived to later
- Good catch, change to bird. FunkMonk (talk) 08:57, 4 June 2013 (UTC)
Quite a thorough article. -- Yzx (talk) 07:21, 4 June 2013 (UTC)
- Thanks for the review, I'll fix the issues now. FunkMonk (talk) 08:39, 4 June 2013 (UTC)
- The article looks good, so I'm promoting. Nice work! -- Yzx (talk) 00:40, 6 June 2013 (UTC)