Talk:Palmate newt/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Starsandwhales (talk · contribs) 22:10, 7 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! I'll be reviewing this article! starsandwhales (talk) 22:10, 7 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)
It is reasonably well written. a (prose, spelling, and grammar): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists): It is factually accurate and verifiable. a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR): d (copyvio and plagiarism): It is broad in its coverage. a (major aspects): b (focused): It follows the neutral point of view policy. Fair representation without bias: It is stable. No edit wars, etc.: It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate. a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
Overall: Pass/Fail:
· · ·

Taxonomy and Reproduction sections seem to have quite a bit of copyvio from [1]. I can't find a date on this website, so I can't tell if it's copying off the article or the other way around.

GBIF uses text from Wikipedia, it's indicated on the top of the page (though the one you linked seems to be for the smooth newt, not the palmate newt).

Interesting, because that is the link that Earwig Copyvio detector found the most copying from.

There's some weird formatting with the citations, are those page numbers?

Yes, these are page numbers; I'm using {{r}} for citations.

References look good, AGF on the journal article in French and the book behind a paywall.
Images & alt-text look good."

Thanks for reviewing, Starsandwhales! Let me know if there's anything else to check. Tylototriton (talk) 15:16, 17 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Can you link snout-vent length?

Done.

"Most recently, it was included in the genus Triturus, along with most European newts." --> the word "it" here is referring to palmate newts? or something else?

Replaced "it" with "the species" to make it clearer.

Link García-París?

This would introduce a redlink which I don't think is necessary.

In the sentence "A dark stripe runs along the head through the eyes." (in the description section) is it still referring to females or is it back to talking about both sexes?

Now specified "In both sexes, ...".

"The species was probably confined to the Iberian peninsula during the Last Glacial Maximum and then expanded its range north of the Pyrenees." --> probably, according to whom? Who is hypothesizing this, and why? Is there a reason why it isn't confirmed?

It's a hypothesis based on genetic data, but I made that now clearer and cited the authors by name: "Genetic analyses by Recuero and García-París suggest that the species was confined...".

"The reproductive period usually extends from February to May, but can start earlier or last longer in the south, depending on elevation" --> how does it depend on elevation? Is it longer the higher it is, or shorter? What about with how far north or south?

Now clarified that it's the Iberian peninsula, but the source is not more detailed about the effects of elevation.

These newts using the geomagnetic field over large distances is very interesting! Do we know more about how it works?

Source does not go into detail, but I now replaced the link for "geomagnetic field" with magnetoreception, which has some info for amphibians. Tylototriton (talk) 17:21, 26 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

"Some larvae instead overwinter in water, and paedomorphism, where adults keep their gills and stay aquatic, is also known." --> The wording here is a bit awkward. These are two different situations? Maybe splitting it into two sentences would help clarify what you mean?

Now merged the first part (larvae overwintering) with previous sentence.

"but cannibalism also occurs, mainly by preying on eggs" is it only adults that prey on eggs or do larvae and efts do it too?

Checked the source and now clarified that it's the larvae.

Other than these instances, I think the writing is good overall. There are also parts where you could go more in depth, such as describing the hypothesis on its historical range, or explaining how it uses the magnetic field to find their breeding ponds.

Thanks for your review, Starsandwhales! Hope I've addressed your points. Sorry for taking a while, was busy with non-Wikipedia life! Tylototriton (talk) 17:21, 26 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

No worries, take your time with real-life things.

Just a small thing. In the speciesbox, you should list all of the synonyms that are used for the first time (and the authority), not just that there are 33 synonyms.

Hi Starsandwhales! I'm not a big fan of adding all synonyms where there are many, and gave only a selection in my recent FAs alpine newt and smooth newt, for example. Aside from the amount of formatting it takes, long lists are awkward on phones as the {{hidden}} template doesn't seem to work there. I really hope synonyms will all be pulled from Wikidata and automatically formatted in the future. Tylototriton (talk) 09:07, 7 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Understandable. starsandwhales (talk) 02:10, 8 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

This article passes my review, so congrats on a new ga! starsandwhales (talk) 02:14, 8 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]