Jump to content

Talk:Northern mockingbird/GA1

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

GA Review

[edit]
GA toolbox
Reviewing

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

Reviewer: Sainsf (talk · contribs) 14:10, 27 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I love reviewing bird articles, let me review this. I go section-wise, my comments:

Lead ✓ Pass

[edit]
  • I think you must create a section "Taxonomy" after lead. Here, as you may be knowing, you describe the bird's genus and species details. There also, say who described it and when and put the citations you have put in lead in this section.Once you cite a thing later in the article, you need not cite it in lead.
I added a "Taxonomy" section but more details are still needed.--Tianyi Cai (talk) 02:11, 4 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Good, but you forgot to say who described it (Linnaeus here) and when (1758 here) (of course add a good reference for these details). Try to find more about these basic details. This is a must for a GA as far as I know. Sainsf <^>Talk all words 16:54, 4 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Hi! I added some more details in "Taxonomy". --Tianyi Cai (talk) 04:34, 11 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Ok, I think this will do. I have some additional comments later in this page. Sainsf <^>Talk all words 06:46, 12 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Add some description details in the lead.
Fixed. --Tianyi Cai (talk) 04:53, 11 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • You say only about its habitat. For an ideal lead, I prefer the first paragraph for describing its name, taxonomy and description; second one to describe its diet, sociability and natural habitat (not range); and the third and last paragraph to describe its range, conservation measures (if any) and miscellaneous details. I wish you did the same.
I did some editing here. Does it look good? --Tianyi Cai (talk) 04:53, 11 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
A great deal better. Add a line more about what the IUCN status (Least Concern, here) of the bird in the last paragraph. You know, the lead should be a mini article. You can add more relevant points about their interaction with humans, which you say about in some ways in "Intelligence". Sainsf <^>Talk all words 06:46, 12 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I added about the intelligence, interaction with humans, urban living, and culture. WhitleyTucker (talk) 23:10, 19 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Taxonomy ✓ Pass

[edit]

Hi, just a few comments:

  • I have rewritten a few things. Looks well now. See the changes.
  • Who are Hunt and Barber? In Wikipedia, you should write the name and identity (whether he is a ornithologist, zoologist and if possible his nationality - just as I have mentioned Linnaeus as a Swedish zoologist) of the person whose claim or research you are stating here. But never their qualifications. Check if there are other instances.
I do not know who these people are either, so I just reworded the sentence and did not include their names. Also, I was earlier told by another commenter on another article that it is best to not use names at all. Thus, all nondescribed names, I plan to delete and reword the sentences, such as the correction to the two following comments. WhitleyTucker (talk) 01:09, 20 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
That is what I prefer to do in my articles. Good! Sainsf <^>Talk all words 15:50, 20 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Northern Mockingbird is considered ... by some scholars "Some scholars" sounds a bit vague. Could you at least mention their nationality?
RewordedWhitleyTucker (talk) 01:09, 20 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Who is Vigors? Link it to the correct binomial authority.
I cannot find any specific name or nationality. My search only shows other articles that have cited this reference. The original contributor will have to address this, otherwise I would just have to remove this part. WhitleyTucker (talk) 01:09, 20 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
If there is no existing page, then no need of more research. It is not so important. Sainsf <^>Talk all words 15:50, 20 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Too negligible, well, I am doing this. Sainsf <^>Talk all words 15:50, 20 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Description ✓ Pass

[edit]
  • Though minor, I think your use of singular or plural must be uniform throughout the section.
I have adopted the singular form all throughout this section. --Tianyi Cai (talk) 01:46, 4 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Good, it's well-written. You could add lifespan details here.
Added now. --Tianyi Cai (talk) 05:00, 11 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Great, this bird has subspecies! This would add to the "Taxonomy" section I proposed. You should shift this into that.
Subspecies info is now under "Taxonomy".--Tianyi Cai (talk) 01:46, 4 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Who is the authority of the first ssp. name?
What is a ssp. name?--Tianyi Cai (talk) 01:46, 4 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Ssp. is short for subspecies. Here I refer to M. m. polyglottos. Sainsf <^>Talk all words 16:54, 4 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry but where can I find the author of the ssp. name? --Tianyi Cai (talk) 05:00, 11 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Must be in the source, surely. But this is needed. Sainsf <^>Talk all words 15:51, 20 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Fixed. LeftAire (talk) 19:39, 21 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Habitat and distribution ✓ Pass

[edit]
  • I think the positioning of this section here breaks the flow. Better place after "Behavior" section.
Thank you for your advice, but I see almost every bird article follows the order from "Taxonomy" to "Description" to "Habitat" and then "Behavior". I think the text is generally structured in a way where non-behavioral information precedes the behavioral one. In this sense, "Habit" does not break the flow since it belongs to basic background facts of the mockingbird.--Tianyi Cai (talk) 01:50, 4 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
okay, as you think right. Of course I haven't seen many bird articles. Sainsf <^>Talk all words 16:54, 4 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Diet ✓ Pass

[edit]
  • According to WP:IMAGELOCATION, images should be placed rather on the right than left (mainly below headings). It applies here, but not everywhere, just the first one or two imgs, I think.
It says on WP:IMAGELOCATION that images can be staggered left and right as long as the text is not sandwiched between two images, so I staggered the images.--Tianyi Cai (talk) 02:09, 4 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Looks fine. Sainsf <^>Talk all words 16:54, 4 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • I am afraid there is a bit of overlinking here.
I undid the links to berry, seed and ornithologist, which I think can be readily understood without referring to the particular sites. I left the rest of the links as they were since they are mostly biological terms that require further explanation.--Tianyi Cai (talk) 02:10, 4 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • The last para. is unsourced. Many parts of the article are like that. This is a big problem to satisfy Verifiability criterion. You can see the problem we are having in another article I am reviewing.
I can see what you are saying, but I don't know where this information comes from because it was not written by me. I'll try to find its source. --Tianyi Cai (talk) 02:10, 4 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The last paragraph appears to be sourced now by some helpful Wikipedian! Tianyi Cai (talk) 05:02, 11 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Great, it ends all issues of this part. Sainsf <^>Talk all words 06:49, 12 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Breeding

[edit]
  • First part unsourced.
I redid this part and sourced my addition. WhitleyTucker (talk) 00:32, 20 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Perhaps you forget to mention, but when do males and females reach sexual maturity?
Added. WhitleyTucker (talk) 23:49, 19 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • In addition to harassing domestic cats and dogs they consider a threat, it is not unheard of for mockingbirds to target humans. needs reference.
The original writer seems to have referenced the human attacks to a newpaper article. I have found another source that addresses the dog and cat attacks.WhitleyTucker (talk) 00:48, 20 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I don't comment much about the rest subsections. Just that parts are unsourced, and:

  • It would be nice if you could add some details about what are the proceedings of the copulation. You only say about the arrangements and selections of mates.
I added as much as I could find. I have not found any legit information about the step-by-step copulation proceedings, but I added a note about how the perform a mating dance face-to-face.WhitleyTucker (talk) 23:49, 19 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Better have a line describing "altricial".
Fixed. --Tianyi Cai (talk) 05:06, 11 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Intelligence, In culture ✓ Pass

[edit]
  • Northern Mockingbirds are a species that are... --> Northern Mockingbird is a species that is...
Fixed.--Tianyi Cai (talk) 01:24, 4 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • However, the mockingbirds do not demonstrate aggression towards every one of the hundreds of passers-byers on a daily basis. Should be everyone and passers-by.
Fixed.--Tianyi Cai (talk) 01:24, 4 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • The image you have used in "In culture" is the same as that of "Description". You can't reuse it. Aren't there others?
I replaced the image with a painting of the northern mockingbird. --Tianyi Cai (talk) 01:24, 4 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • You must not write pointwise. Make paragraphs.
Fixed.--Tianyi Cai (talk) 01:24, 4 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Fixed.Tianyi Cai (talk) 20:48, 6 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Very well, all issues fixed here! Sainsf <^>Talk all words 09:10, 7 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Others

[edit]

My preliminary comments. I wait till you reply. I have a good impression of this, cheers! Sainsf <^>Talk all words 14:10, 27 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Sainsf,

Thank you for your review! I will get to the edits as soon as possible. WhitleyTucker (talk) 21:37, 28 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Sainsf! Thank you so much for your comments! I have already attended to some of them. Let me know what you think about my edits. WhitleyTucker and I are both students in a behavioral ecology class in college. We are new to editing Wikipedia articles but we will do our best pushing this entry to GA standards! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tianyi Cai (talk • contribs) 02:52, 4 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Great help you are giving to Wikipedia! You can ask me if you need help editing here. About this article, this is a great deal nicer than other GANs I have reviewed, this has less issues, so that is a plus point. I have stroke out resolved issues and replied to some, go on with the rest. You are working good to bring this is to GA! Sainsf <^>Talk all words 16:54, 4 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I've added the citation to the Florida Scrub-Jay reference to the page, and a few more. I originally began to edit the article back in August, but stopped because of school. I was previously working on the Portuguese Empire (taking a break from Bird-related), but I'll assist with citations where needed. Some of the work maybe remnants of information of what was there before I started working, but I think most of its gone now, excluding a few a might have to go back for. If there's some from inappropriate site such as bird watching sites, or some not from reputable books, peer reviews, etc, I'll try to root it out. LeftAire (talk) 23:00, 4 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Good. I think some references are not correctly written, so presently I am fixing them.
Important note: But I have left the PDF references for you to fix up, as it is a journal PDF, and I have late access to PDFs on web. I say, you (who has cited) must know how to cite properly; you have made many mistakes which can be bad for GAN. I have removed an improper ref or two. See my overall edits here.Sainsf <^>Talk all words 12:31, 6 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I fixed most of the PDF references except for [16]. The online PDF appears to be a portion of a bigger work but I do not know where to find its author(s) and the journal name etc. Tianyi Cai (talk) 05:15, 11 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Fixed #16! My apologies regarding those citations. This isn't my first time assisting in a GAN, so I should've known better....If you need anything else, I won't be able to help until after exams tomorrow....LeftAire (talk) 00:07, 12 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Almost all is finished, but "Behavior" still has unsourced parts and "Description" an unresolved issue. Let's get to those soon. Sainsf <^>Talk all words 15:56, 20 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I've added more citations for the sections that I mainly worked on, everything past the 'feeding' section is material I didn't add onto the page, excluding a few citations. I'll look for some citations where I can find them to help those sections, but I'm limited due to the lack of full access to sites such as JSTOR. I'll try to find some on Google Scholar.LeftAire (talk) 19:42, 21 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • OK, so now just one issue remains - unsourced parts in "Sexual selection", "Mating", "Parental care" and "Adaptation to urban habitats" sections. And the part The traditional American lullaby "Hush Little Baby"...American folk song, "Listen to the Mocking Bird" in the section "In culture". What is its reference? Please fix this soon. Sainsf <^>Talk all words 13:44, 22 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks a lot to LeftAire for fixing this issue. Now the article is gonna be a GA. Congrats! Sainsf <^>Talk all words 06:46, 6 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Northern_mockingbird/GA1&oldid=1136250851"