Jump to content

Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/European Nightjar/archive1

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The following is an archived discussion of a featured article nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured article candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.

The article was promoted by Ian Rose 13:24, 28 March 2014 [1].

European Nightjar

[edit]
Nominator(s): Jimfbleak - talk to me? 15:28, 10 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This is a harmless nocturnal bird, despite the old myth that the "goatsucker" caused livestock to cease producing milk and go blind. It doesn't really host the souls of infants who die before baptism either. Thanks to Snowman for his helpful comments and edits prior to this nomination. Jimfbleak - talk to me? 15:28, 10 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Image review from Cirt

[edit]
  1. File:Heathland, near Bere Regis - geograph.org.uk - 587734.jpg = tagged at Wikimedia Commons page with categories need to be checked.
  2. File:Caprimulgus europaeus C.jpg = missing image description. Source field and author field don't seem to match, that's problematic.

— Cirt (talk) 18:51, 10 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for image review. I've checked the cats from the first, removed the second since the sourcing is unclear Jimfbleak - talk to me? 19:07, 10 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Great, thank you! All images now check out okay. Image review passes. Cheers, — Cirt (talk) 20:01, 10 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Source review from Cirt

[edit]

Source review follows, below:

  1. Reference number one confirms category of Least Concern for the bird.
  2. Source 19 confirms fact that species can go into torpor and slow metabolism.
  3. Cite 21 confirms six percent of egg weight is shell.
  4. Ref 36 confirms fact that the birds are adversely affected by disturbance, such as dogs.

Spot checks done for above sources. These cited sources all confirm the stated material in the article body text. Source review completed. — Cirt (talk) 23:54, 10 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for sources check, I'm afraid this article has far fewer easily accessible sources than most of my FAs since most of the sources are books or paywalled Jimfbleak - talk to me? 07:00, 11 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Ah yes -- one recommendation related to this would be please to note in your citations if each source happens to be paywalled or subscription required. There's the template {{subscription required}} and other helpful templates at Template:Subscription_required#See_also. — Cirt (talk) 10:37, 11 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I think I've done that for the web sites, unless I've missed one. Journals and books don't need the template because they are assumed to be inaccessible/paywalled unless there is a link to free content, as with the Linnaeus one. Web pages are different because they are assumed to be accessible unless you are told they are paywalled. I don't think anyone templates journals as "subscription needed" Jimfbleak - talk to me? 10:06, 12 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Comments from Aa77zz

[edit]

The articles looks good. I've made a few small edits.

  • The demonstrative "this" is used frequently and sounds very odd to me. There are five occurrences just in the lead: "this species" x2, "this nightjar", "this nocturnal bird", "this bird"
Drastically pruned Jimfbleak - talk to me? 17:07, 14 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • I'm not enamoured by the image used in the infobox
Nor me, but the only other "good" image available had copyright issues, see above Jimfbleak - talk to me? 17:07, 14 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Taxonomy

  • "The largest and most widespread of the several genera is Caprimulgus, the "typical" nightjars, characterised by stiff bristles around the mouth and patterned plumage." The sentence suggests that only the species in the Caprimulgus genus are "typical" nightjars, while according to the nightjar article, all the members of the Caprimulginae subfamily are "typical" nightjars and have the bristles and the patterned plumage.
I looked at my other main ref which gave a suite of features characterising the genus, added. removed "typical" Jimfbleak - talk to me? 17:07, 14 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • "several genera" - is a dozen several?
Just mentioned the genus without quantification Jimfbleak - talk to me? 17:07, 14 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Behaviour

  • Repetition: "A roost site is used regularly..." is followed by "Again, roost sites are used on a regular basis." Perhaps delete the second sentence.
Arguable, since one refers to breeding areas and other to wintering grounds, but removed anyway Jimfbleak - talk to me? 17:07, 14 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Something may be lost here. What about "Roost sites at both the breeding and wintering grounds are used regularly if they are undisturbed, ...". Snowman (talk) 17:08, 15 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Good idea, done Jimfbleak - talk to me? 06:49, 16 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • "It uses trees more often than the local nightjar species." This appears somewhat cryptic. Which species are these? The Rufous-cheeked Nightjar in west Africa and Sombre Nightjar in east Africa? Aa77zz (talk) 14:29, 14 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Removed, not needed Jimfbleak - talk to me? 07:35, 15 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for reviewing, all done I think Jimfbleak - talk to me? 17:07, 14 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The article claims that the size of territories ranges from 1.5–32 ha - a factor of more than 20. The upper limit seems fairly meaningless - in Ireland where there are very few birds the territories could be huge. At the end of the paragraph the article states that in good habitat there can be up to 20 pairs per km^2. One can calculate that this corresponds to a territory size of 5 ha. How do ornithologists measure the area of a territory? I assume they count the number of nests in a known area. The article appears to give two different numbers for the minimum size - either 1.5 ha or 5 ha. Aa77zz (talk) 17:41, 14 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Good point, and they are from the same source! Yes, it is area/nests. I've removed the range of figures since, as you say, they seem less plausible. I suspect that in prime habitat you probably do get territories somewhat smaller than 5 ha, but that's pure OR Jimfbleak - talk to me? 07:35, 15 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Support. Another excellent article from Jim. It is unfortunate that there aren't better photos available. Aa77zz (talk) 08:13, 15 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for support (and for the French mites) 15:23, 15 March 2014 (UTC)

Comments from Crisco

[edit]

Mmm.... goat's milk...

Done Jimfbleak - talk to me? 15:21, 17 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Perhaps state explicitly that females don't sing?
Done Jimfbleak - talk to me? 15:21, 17 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • The maximum known age is just over 12 years. - wild or captive?
I should imagine it is nearly impossible to keep these in captivity, but made explicit Jimfbleak - talk to me? 15:21, 17 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
All linked Jimfbleak - talk to me? 15:21, 17 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • any plant material and non-flying invertebrates consumed is - is this correct? (V-S agreement)
Illiteracy, I'm afraid, corrected Jimfbleak - talk to me? 15:21, 17 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • These adaptations favouring nightjars night vision will have compromised their colour vision. - I'd rather not use the "will have" construction here. Alternatives?
It repeats "vision" too, now These adaptations favour good night vision at the expense of colour discrimination Jimfbleak - talk to me? 15:22, 17 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Lede is 4 paragraphs; awfully long for a 20k character article
Trimmed to three Jimfbleak - talk to me? 15:21, 17 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Otherwise very nice. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 12:31, 17 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for review and helpful comments Jimfbleak - talk to me? 15:21, 17 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for support Jimfbleak - talk to me? 16:48, 17 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Comments from FunkMonk

[edit]

I'll give it a read and add some comments, but in the meantime, the article seems a bit empty, here are two nice images[2][3] on Commons, could they be used? The gape is especially interesting, and description has no images. Glad to see the garish collage go, by the way... FunkMonk (talk) 19:07, 17 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

both added Jimfbleak - talk to me? 20:26, 17 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Done Jimfbleak - talk to me? 07:07, 18 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
The obvious question is; Why has it got its mouth open? Is this typical behavior? The shadows in the image indicate that bright lights were used probably at night or poor light, so I guess that the bird was frightened. Do they growl like parrots to frighten away predictors? To me the picture would need some explanatory captioning to sit better on the page. Snowman (talk) 10:53, 18 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Regardless of the context the photo was taken in, it is relevant to the text, which specifically states it has a large gape, but small beak. I can't think of a better way to show it than an actual, gaping bird. We have drawn diagrams on Commons, but it just isn't the same. FunkMonk (talk) 10:56, 18 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I can see that it illustrates parts of the text well, but it also poses unanswered questions. Apart from camouflage, I would ask about how a young bird alone on the ground would defend itself and wonder if this bird is frightened. I am hoping that User Jimfbleak will find something relevant. Snowman (talk) 11:13, 18 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Could it be in a nest? FunkMonk (talk) 11:27, 18 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Since there is no nest construction, it's not possible to tell, and a bird this size will probably have moved anyway. It's unlikely to be begging, a near-adult bird would recognise an adult. Alarmed large young give a "guttural hiss", but I don't know if this involves gaping as shown. I'll see if I can clarify and add that if it's appropriate Jimfbleak - talk to me? 15:59, 18 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
OK, it is a threat display, added with shiny new ref Jimfbleak - talk to me? 16:13, 18 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • "although the male shows white patches in the wings and tail as he flies at night." Is it just me who thinks using "he" seems a bit out of place?
"it" Jimfbleak - talk to me? 20:26, 17 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • "The Jungle Nightjar is sometimes considered to be the eastern equivalent of the European species." What is meant by equivalent? A subspecies?
It is replaced further east in Asia by the Jungle Nightjar which occupies similar habitat Jimfbleak - talk to me? 20:26, 17 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • "This nightjar formerly bred in Syria and Lebanon." Why not anymore? Seems a weird hole, when it breeds in Israel and Iraq.
We are right on the edge of the breeding range here, I think it has only a toehold in Israel. I suspect that I may not be able to find any explanation beyond the bare fact, but I'll see what I can do. If you want some OR, I'd guess loss of habitat and/or climate change Jimfbleak - talk to me? 20:26, 17 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • "with wings held in a V" V-shape?
Changed, although I thought the original was unambiguous Jimfbleak - talk to me? 07:07, 18 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
It was unambiguous, but seemed a bit fragmentary. FunkMonk (talk) 10:17, 18 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • "If the female is disturbed while breeding, she runs or flutters along the ground feigning injury until she has drawn the intruder away. She may also move the eggs a short distance with her bill.[3]" This comes after paragraphs about hatchlings. Shouldn't it come before?
Done Jimfbleak - talk to me? 07:07, 18 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • "Although they have tiny bills" Tiny seems a bit informal?
"very small" Jimfbleak - talk to me? 07:07, 18 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • "Both adults feed the young with balls of insects." Regurgitated or "raw"?
  • Cleere uses the word "regurgitated" with regard to feeding the chicks, but it's unclear whether he means mouth-to-mouth or stomach-to-mouth (I hope you are not eating!). Other sources either don't describe the process or copy Cleere. I've tweaked to basically rephrase as per Cleere. My assumption would be that they hold the food in their mouths, but I can't confirm that, and proving it with a nocturnal bird wouldn't be easy Jimfbleak - talk to me? 07:07, 18 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for review and comments so far Jimfbleak - talk to me? 07:07, 18 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for support, I'm really surprised that I couldn't answer the last question, but I suppose it like trying to find an RS that a particular species of small bird is eaten by Sparrowhawks Jimfbleak - talk to me? 15:49, 18 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Comments from Cas Liber

[edit]
  • Right then....
that breeds in most of Europe and temperate Asia. - I'd say "that breeds across most of Europe and temperate Asia." - as the latter preposition carries the connotation of breadth more weightily...
Done Jimfbleak - talk to me? 19:18, 21 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
although the male shows white patches in the wings and tail it he flies at night. - umm, two pronouns at end...grammar?
oops, done Jimfbleak - talk to me? 19:20, 21 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
If there is any way to avoid all three paras of lead starting "The European Nightjar..."
I'm a bit stuck on this. The original text used circumlacations like this nightjar... this species... this bird..., but a previous reviewer objected to these circumlocutions Jimfbleak - talk to me? 19:18, 21 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I must admit I've never been fond of the multiple "this"es - I tried this - nothing is a real dealbreaker so keep or leave as see fit. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 01:37, 22 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Only one record of the species possibly dates back to the late Eocene, - this and the next read oddly - the Pleistocene is much later than the Eocene, so "as far back as the late Pleistocene" seems odd coming right after mention of Eocene...were the epochs transposed accidentally?
Removed the second part, it's what the source says, but doesn't really make sense. Jimfbleak - talk to me? 19:20, 21 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Other old names refer to the song.... - I'd take the names to "moth hawk", which are prosaic descriptors, and place in taxonomy section at end. I'd then add lich fowl and gabble ratchet in sentence onto the previous para after mention of puckeridge.
Done Jimfbleak - talk to me? 19:18, 21 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Nice read overall - nearly there. Support on comprehensiveness and prose. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 14:15, 21 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for review and comments Jimfbleak - talk to me? 19:18, 21 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Your version is a distinct improvement, thanks for that Jimfbleak - talk to me? 06:22, 22 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I forgot to thank you for your support, thanks Jimfbleak - talk to me? 06:40, 24 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Featured_article_candidates/European_Nightjar/archive1&oldid=1046367352"