Talk:Sirenia/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Adityavagarwal (talk · contribs) 07:33, 27 August 2017 (UTC)

• "This comes from a legend about their discovery, involving lonely sailors mistaking them for mermaids." needs citation. Adityavagarwal (talk) 07:33, 27 August 2017 (UTC)

added   User:Dunkleosteus77 |push to talk  15:18, 27 August 2017 (UTC)

• "Seekoei (sea cow) is also the name for a hippopotamus in Afrikaans." and "In some Germanic languages, see can mean either a body of fresh or salt water, so this follows from the species inhabiting lakes in southern Africa rather than the sea itself." need citation to. Adityavagarwal (talk) 07:33, 27 August 2017 (UTC)

fixed   User:Dunkleosteus77 |push to talk  15:18, 27 August 2017 (UTC)

• Hydromalinae should be linked. Adityavagarwal (talk) 07:33, 27 August 2017 (UTC)

oops, fixed   User:Dunkleosteus77 |push to talk  15:18, 27 August 2017 (UTC)

• Dugonginae too should be linked. Adityavagarwal (talk) 07:33, 27 August 2017 (UTC)

it just links back to dugong so it'd be a duplink   User:Dunkleosteus77 |push to talk  15:18, 27 August 2017 (UTC)

• 8 km/h (5.0 mph) or 8 kilometres per hour (5.0 mph), we could have consistency there. Adityavagarwal (talk) 07:33, 27 August 2017 (UTC)

fixed   User:Dunkleosteus77 |push to talk  15:18, 27 August 2017 (UTC)

• 8 to 10 t (8.8 to 11.0 short tons) (in the lead) is metric tons right? The "t" makes it look more like tons. Also, we could have consistency with "8 to 10 metric tons (8.8 to 11.0 short tons)"

fixed   User:Dunkleosteus77 |push to talk  15:18, 27 August 2017 (UTC)

• Similarly, 8 m (26 ft) and 9 metres (30 ft) (m or metres) could have consistency too. Adityavagarwal (talk) 07:33, 27 August 2017 (UTC)

fixed   User:Dunkleosteus77 |push to talk  15:18, 27 August 2017 (UTC)

• Link "snout". Adityavagarwal (talk) 07:33, 27 August 2017 (UTC)

done   User:Dunkleosteus77 |push to talk  15:18, 27 August 2017 (UTC)

• "virtually endless ..." is it not a bit exaggerated? Adityavagarwal (talk) 07:33, 27 August 2017 (UTC)

changed to "infinite"   User:Dunkleosteus77 |push to talk  15:18, 27 August 2017 (UTC)

• "brevotoxin..." is it "brevetoxin" instead? Adityavagarwal (talk) 07:33, 27 August 2017 (UTC)

fixed   User:Dunkleosteus77 |push to talk  15:18, 27 August 2017 (UTC)

• Do we really need this as an External Link? Adityavagarwal (talk) 07:33, 27 August 2017 (UTC)

nope, deleted   User:Dunkleosteus77 |push to talk  15:18, 27 August 2017 (UTC)

• Current ref 17 needs a page number. Adityavagarwal (talk) 07:33, 27 August 2017 (UTC)

if it's "The Earliest Known Fully Quadrupedal Sirenian" I think someone beat me to it, it's fixed   User:Dunkleosteus77 |push to talk  15:18, 27 August 2017 (UTC)

Oops, I mean 19. I have fixed it. Adityavagarwal (talk) 16:15, 27 August 2017 (UTC)

A really solid article!

---

Very well written!

1. Is it well written?

   A. The prose is clear and concise, and the spelling and grammar are correct:

   B. It complies with the manual of style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation:

2. Is it verifiable with no original research?

   A. It contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline:

   B. All in-line citations are from reliable sources, including those for direct quotations, statistics, published opinion, counter-intuitive or controversial statements that are challenged or likely to be challenged, and contentious material relating to living persons—science-based articles should follow the scientific citation guidelines:

   C. It contains no original research:

   D. It contains no copyright violations nor plagiarism:

3. Is it broad in its coverage?

   A. It addresses the main aspects of the topic:

   B. It stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style):

4. Is it neutral?

   It represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each:

5. Is it stable?

   It does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute:

6. Is it illustrated, if possible, by images?

   A. Images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid fair use rationales are provided for non-free content:

   B. Images are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions:

7. Overall:

   Pass or Fail:

An article of stellar quality. Stellar? We could have a star on it too! Very well written, and an obvious GA pass! Adityavagarwal (talk) 16:19, 27 August 2017 (UTC)