Talk:Swift fox/GA1

GA Review

Through a reading of this article, I think that a little more work should be conducted before getting to GA status. The prose is not too bad, but inconsistent citations and a few unanswered questions are probably this article's biggest problems.

Overcitation is probably the most pressing issue. I would encourage you to look for more citations, since much of the citations seem to revolve around a few websites, which is not advisable. Look for print materials or in Google Book Search to find other print materials if you can. If you can also find journal articles on the Swift Fox, that would be even better.
Images are good, but sparse. Digging around in Commons, I managed to find a second image Image:Kitfuchs.jpg. If you can upload more images, the US Fish and Wildlife Service is a great place to look for public domain images. Done
It looks sufficiently broad to pass for a GA, but there are a few questions that arise. Do Swift Foxes have any unique behaviors? I think the part I would have liked to see more about is how they interact with Kit Foxes. Not necessary, but it's food for thought if you'd like to expand further.
Are there any other predators besides the coyote? I would like to see that statement cited also. Done
For the Behavior section, the paragraphs would probably look less choppier merged. Done
Why is it called the Swift Fox? Is it because it can run up to 50 km/h? If so, then it should belong in the lead.
Just as a note, remember to add conversions for your units (e.g. inches to centimeters, km/h to mph). I have done this for you. Done (Thanks) Corvus coronoides _talk 16:02, 19 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Diurnal or nocturnal? I'm assuming diurnal, but it would be nice to know when they are most active. Done
What exactly is a "winter-killed deer"? Also, the diet section should have another citation or two. Done
It should also be mentioned that the Swift Fox is not endangered in the US. Done
The cite temp in ref 1 is missing its "pages" parameter.
Try to also incorporate your "general references" in with the rest.

I'm putting this article on hold to see if these issues might be remedied. bibliomaniac 1 5 18:44, 18 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I have begun work to address the issues you've listed. However, where you mention ref 1 missing its pages parameter, I checked the source link and its a website, not a book. I'm not sure what you meant there - could you clarify? Also, I believe that it is clearly stated in the second sentence of the "Behavior" section that the foxes are nocturnal. How should I make this more clear? Lastly, the "General References" are an issue in that they were there before I began working on the article, so I can't really make them in-line cites because I don't have the sources. What do you recommend - delete them or leave them there as a subsection? Corvus coronoides _talk 23:53, 18 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, I didn't catch the nocturnal part. For ref 1, it appears to be based off of a book (note the ISBN), and since the page parameter isn't filled in, there's a "{{{pages}}}" in it. If you don't have it, I don't think that it is a major issue. My suggestion for the general references is to look for them and incorporate them into the refs. Usually, they will only be an outline if you have guest access. You can contact Wikipedia:WikiProject Resource Exchange to get you the whole thing. If you can't find them, you should probably delete them, but remember them just in case something turns up later. bibliomaniac 1 5 17:34, 20 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I have addressed most of the things you mentioned. I am looking for those "general references" but no luck as yet. I am also leaving today for a summer camp so I may or may not be able to address everything in the next few days. You mentioned wanting to know why it is called the swift fox - I assume it is because it can run fast, but I can find no source that says so, so I am reluctant to incorporate it into the lead. I'm also looking into Swift Fox interaction with Kit Foxes. Corvus coronoides _talk 13:05, 22 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You've fixed all the prose, which is good. I think that the article is GA, but it will take much more improvement to get it "up there." I'll promote, but keep working on this. bibliomaniac 1 5 19:04, 26 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! I will keep working on this - sorry for the late reply - I'm at camp and this is the first time that I've had internet access. (sockpuppet for public computers, in case it's not clear). --Alternate Account of Corvus coronoides talk 16:53, 1 July 2008 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Corvus moneduloides (talk • contribs) [reply]