Talk:Onefin electric ray/GA1
Appearance
GA Review
[edit]GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch
Reviewer: FunkMonk (talk · contribs) 05:59, 4 June 2013 (UTC)
- Hi, I'll review this one, another nice little article. FunkMonk (talk) 05:59, 4 June 2013 (UTC)
- The taxonomy section could need some classification info. What are the closest relatives, etc.
- I don't know of any study looking at the relationship between the Narke species. There's some genus-level phylogenetic data, but I prefer to keep that stuff out of species-level articles.
- Any info on what grounds it has been referred to that genus then? FunkMonk (talk) 06:52, 4 June 2013 (UTC)
- Well, it defines Narke as it's the type species. I added a note on Kaup's definition of the genus. -- Yzx (talk) 07:43, 4 June 2013 (UTC)
- See, that's interesting and notable enough to be added in this article. Could it be mentioned that other species was since added to the genus? FunkMonk (talk) 07:52, 4 June 2013 (UTC)
- I've noted it. -- Yzx (talk) 08:15, 4 June 2013 (UTC)
- See, that's interesting and notable enough to be added in this article. Could it be mentioned that other species was since added to the genus? FunkMonk (talk) 07:52, 4 June 2013 (UTC)
- Well, it defines Narke as it's the type species. I added a note on Kaup's definition of the genus. -- Yzx (talk) 07:43, 4 June 2013 (UTC)
- Any info on what grounds it has been referred to that genus then? FunkMonk (talk) 06:52, 4 June 2013 (UTC)
- I don't know of any study looking at the relationship between the Narke species. There's some genus-level phylogenetic data, but I prefer to keep that stuff out of species-level articles.
- "It grows up to 38 cm (15 in) long and 26 cm (10 in) across, though individuals of this size are rare.[6][8]" Any info on the average then?
- Not to my knowledge.
- "It is most often found shallower than 50–100 m (160–330 ft)" Areas shallower than?
- Clarified.
- Maybe note where the infobox image was taken?
- I don't think it's particularly important. The species range is so small anyway and there's no indication of geographic variation in appearance.
- That's about it from me, nice to see these obscure species get some attention. FunkMonk (talk) 06:17, 4 June 2013 (UTC)
- Let me know of further issues. -- Yzx (talk) 06:29, 4 June 2013 (UTC)
- Alright, I think it looks good now, so I will pass it. FunkMonk (talk) 08:28, 4 June 2013 (UTC)
- Thanks for the review. -- Yzx (talk) 08:32, 4 June 2013 (UTC)
- Alright, I think it looks good now, so I will pass it. FunkMonk (talk) 08:28, 4 June 2013 (UTC)
- Let me know of further issues. -- Yzx (talk) 06:29, 4 June 2013 (UTC)