Talk:Newton's parakeet/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: J Milburn (talk · contribs) 15:56, 17 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Happy to offer some thoughts. Review to follow soon. J Milburn (talk) 15:56, 17 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the review, and the fixes! The specimen in the following sentence was not sexed: "Newton's collector, Mr. Slater, had seen a male the year before, but was not carrying a gun at the time" Is it too vague to just write specimen? FunkMonk (talk) 18:34, 17 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

It isn't, but from the context I thought you meant a male- it may be worth saying something like "a specimen of unclear sex" or something. (I'm not that keen on "specimen", either- it's a bit clinical for me...) J Milburn (talk) 15:08, 19 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The source doesn't even say that much, so I wonder whether we could? It may have been a male, but Newton didn't state anything about its sex. FunkMonk (talk) 22:30, 19 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

That's fair- you do what you think right. Just be aware of the context- try not to inadvertently imply sex if we don't know it. J Milburn (talk) 22:50, 19 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

"probably been isolated on Rodrigues for a long time" Very vague. How long are we talking, here?

The source only says "but the derived nature of P. exsul suggests that it has long been on Rodrigues." Since no genetic studies have been successful, it can't really be said... FunkMonk (talk) 18:34, 17 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

You mention beak colour twice in the lead

Removed one. FunkMonk (talk) 18:34, 17 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

What's a "Bois d’olive"? Does it definitely need to be capitalised?

Clarified, it is a tree. It was spelled that way in the source, but I have changed it. FunkMonk (talk) 18:40, 17 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

"after they were abandoned there by their captain" What were they doing on the ship? If they were military sailors, being abandoned by the captain would make sense, but it's a little jarring here

They were marooned on the way to Réunion, which they were to colonise, apparently because the French wanted to take possession of Rodrigues as well. How much should I go into detail? FunkMonk (talk) 19:35, 17 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I think it would read much better if you just said "after they were marooned there". Why were they marooned? Do we know? "marooned there following an argument with the crew of the ship on which they were travelling"?

It appears to be a bit complicated, and isn't stated in the sources relating to the parrot itself, only mentioned in passing. But I think it was because the French had taken over Réunion by the time they were to arrive, and since they were Huguenots, they were unwanted by the French. But I'd have to read up on Leguat himself to be sure. There is a longer account about him in the entry about the Rodrigues Solitaire in the Extinct Bird book by Fuller. They ended up on Mauritius later, and I think they were arrested by the French there. FunkMonk (talk) 22:41, 19 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

"Newton's collector, Mr. Slater, had seen a male the year before, but was not carrying a gun at the time." A quick reminder of the nature of 19th century naturalism!

Heh, I wonder how many species have been exterminated by museum collectors... The Great Auk also comes to mind. Should I add something? FunkMonk (talk) 19:07, 17 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

No need to add anything, it just struck me as very interesting! J Milburn (talk) 15:08, 19 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

"The mandible and sternum was" Were?

Fixed. FunkMonk (talk) 19:10, 17 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Psittacus?

Whoops, changed to Psittacula. FunkMonk (talk) 19:07, 17 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

"Skeletal features indicate an especially close relationship with the Alexandrine Parakeet, but the many derived features of Newton's Parakeet indicates it has long been isolated on Rodrigues" What are "derived features"?

Is the link enough? FunkMonk (talk) 19:11, 17 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Yep. No idea how I haven't come across that term before. J Milburn (talk) 15:08, 19 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

"be Psittaculines." What does this term mean? Members of the family? Order?

Members of the "tribe" Psittaculini. Change? FunkMonk (talk) 18:57, 17 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I've added a note to the article. J Milburn (talk) 15:08, 19 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not clear on what relevance much of the third paragraph of the evolution section has.

It is to show that the hypothesis that all Mascarene parrots are members of Psittaculni may/is incorrect. Trim? FunkMonk (talk) 19:10, 17 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I'm just worried about synthesis- I'm not sure we can really infer much from a study which didn't include the species. (However, I think a mention that a study took place which didn't include the species is actually worth including.) J Milburn (talk) 15:08, 19 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I've cut off most of it, is it enough? FunkMonk (talk) 22:32, 19 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

"It was 40 cm (16 in) long. The wing of the male was 198 mm (7.7 in), the tail 206 mm (8.11 in), the culmen 25 mm (0.9 in), and the tarsus was 22 mm (0.8 in)." I don't really like the certainty of these measurements. Obviously, not all would have been that size- perhaps specify that these were the measurements of the specimens you've already mentioned?

Yep, will do. FunkMonk (talk) 19:01, 17 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

"cere", "nape" - Unexplained jargon

Linked, is that enough? FunkMonk (talk) 18:44, 17 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Yep. J Milburn (talk) 15:08, 19 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

"but appeared to change from blue tinged when viewed against light to green when viewed from the opposite aspect." What's the "opposite aspect" to against the light? In the dark?

The source says "the blue tinge in which predominates when the bird is seen against the light, and the green when seen in contrary aspect." Would contrary be better? FunkMonk (talk) 19:01, 17 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not really clear on what this means- if I was writing, I'd probably simplify to something like "the same feathers can display both blue and green tinges, depending on the light". However, I'm happy to defer to how you want to write it. J Milburn (talk) 15:08, 19 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I've incorporated most of your phrasing, how does it look? FunkMonk (talk) 22:26, 19 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

You seem to mention twice that the green specimens may have been other species

But two different kinds. I've rephrased it, should it be tweaked further? FunkMonk (talk) 19:29, 17 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

"full male Newton's Parakeet" Do you mean a mature male?

Yes, will fix. "Full" was taken form the source. FunkMonk (talk) 18:43, 17 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

"Newton's Parakeet may not have become rare yet by 1843." I don't see what this has got to do with the following sentences

Changed, does it make more sense? FunkMonk (talk) 19:16, 17 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Much clearer, but perhaps mention which government? J Milburn (talk) 15:08, 19 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The source doesn't say, but I assume Rodriguan, which would be British by extension, since it was a colony at the time. But that's speculation. FunkMonk (talk) 22:23, 19 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps worth mentioning that some have mused it may have survived after the cyclones in the lead?

Done, does it look ok? FunkMonk (talk) 18:57, 17 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Looks good to me- it draws the reader in. A little mystery? How exciting! J Milburn (talk) 15:08, 19 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The Leguat footnote isn't very well formatted. Same for the Fuller source.

Better? FunkMonk (talk) 19:29, 17 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I've changed them from Template:Citation to Template:Cite book. J Milburn (talk) 15:08, 19 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Does Newton's 1875 source need italics in the article title?

Yes, fixed. FunkMonk (talk) 19:16, 17 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Is the Mauritius category needed? If so, perhaps create it and populate it with a few other articles?

Removed it, was added by someone yesterday. FunkMonk (talk) 18:43, 17 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

All in all, solid. The writing's a little choppy in places, but certainly not poor. J Milburn (talk) 16:37, 17 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Heheh, yeah, I did this one as late night procrastination, to get away from a school assignments, so I may have been sloppy... FunkMonk (talk) 18:37, 17 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for further fixes, I've changed some stuff, and added questions. FunkMonk (talk) 22:41, 19 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

On a related note, I wonder whether you have an opinion on this: I've included the frontpiece of Leguat's memoirs under behaviour, because Leguat is discussed under the section, and because it gives an impression of the circumstances when the parrot was observed. But there are also these images, Leguat's map of Rodrigues[1], and Leguat's map of his settlement[2], do you think any of those would make more sense there instead? FunkMonk (talk) 22:52, 19 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- I don't think any of the three add much beyond decoration- I don't think there's much between them, to be honest. I take your point about providing some context, though. J Milburn (talk) 15:21, 24 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I'm going to go ahead and promote. It's not quite perfect, and would probably require a bit more polishing before FAC (if you're considering it) but I'm happy that it's ready for GA status. J Milburn (talk) 15:21, 24 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, I don't think I'm going to FAC this one, and I've done a few GAs that I don't think I'd care to nominate either. Those species are too "normal" or little known for me to really want to push the articles. But who knows, one day I may return to them if I want to get away from actual work... FunkMonk (talk) 18:04, 29 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]