Jump to content

Talk:White-eyed river martin

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Featured articleWhite-eyed river martin is a featured article; it (or a previous version of it) has been identified as one of the best articles produced by the Wikipedia community. Even so, if you can update or improve it, please do so.
Featured topic starWhite-eyed river martin is part of the River martin series, a featured topic. This is identified as among the best series of articles produced by the Wikipedia community. If you can update or improve it, please do so.
Main Page trophyThis article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page as Today's featured article on July 31, 2021.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
January 4, 2008Good article nomineeListed
December 13, 2009Good topic candidatePromoted
November 7, 2012Featured article candidatePromoted
November 22, 2012Featured topic candidatePromoted
Current status: Featured article

Successful good article nomination

[edit]

I am glad to report that this article nomination for good article status has been promoted. This is how the article, as of January 4, 2008, compares against the six good article criteria:

1. Well written?: Check
2. Factually accurate?: Check
3. Broad in coverage?: Check
4. Neutral point of view?: Check
5. Article stability? Check
6. Images?: Check

Well written. Nothing to say, quite excellent in my opinion. :) If you feel that this review is in error, feel free to take it to Good article reassessment. Thank you to all of the editors who worked hard to bring it to this status, and congratulations. Rt. 15:35, 4 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

The article already mentions that the species is protected under the CITES Appendix 1. This is locally applied through its designation as a reserved wild animal species.[1] under the Wild Animal Reservation and Protection Act, BE 2535.[2] This could be mentioned in the article. --Paul_012 (talk) 06:14, 25 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Photo

[edit]

I've uploaded a photo I took of one of the specimens at Chulalongkorn University. I'll leave it to the article's regular contributors to decide how best it should be used. --Paul_012 (talk) 11:40, 3 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for that, Paul, I didn't expect ever to get an image of the actual bird Jimfbleak - talk to me? 11:46, 3 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Edit summary

[edit]

Shyamal, no, just my stupidity. Not picked up at FAC either... Jimfbleak - talk to me? 05:43, 22 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, knowing your careful editing, I was worried that I might have been in error. Shyamal (talk) 05:46, 22 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Main drawing

[edit]

This stylised drawing of the bird is very inappropriate as the main illustration of this bird. Is there no scientific drawing/accurate drawing, or clear photo that can be used? The stylised drawing is more like a logo. 81.147.167.25 (talk) 08:45, 31 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]