Wikipedia:Featured article review/Whale song/archive1
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
- The following is an archived discussion of a featured article review. Please do not modify it. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page or at Wikipedia talk:Featured article review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The article was removed by YellowAssessmentMonkey 00:39, 10 August 2009 [1].
| Toolbox |
|---|
Review commentary
[edit]- Notifications complete: Main contributor and nominator User:Pcb21 and only wikiproject: Wikipedia:WikiProject Cetaceans
Criteria 1(c) - currently needs more inline citations Tom B (talk) 20:55, 6 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Images:
- File:Humpback song spectrogram.png: The description and source do not match the image. The image file is not the same one that was uploaded with the description.
- Replaced. ceranthor 14:45, 12 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- File:Humpback song.PNG: doesn't "redrawn" simply mean copied? I'm not sure of the copyright status. DrKiernan (talk) 10:16, 7 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: Links checked [2] all seem fine except external link "Voices in the Sea". Aaroncrick(Tassie Boy talk) 10:27, 7 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment - I'm referencing the article, bit by bit, getting rid of weasel terms and fixing anything that doesn't quite comply with the sources. By tomorrow, it should be fully referenced. ceranthor 18:03, 12 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Ceranthor said he's working on saving this article, so here are a few comments to help along the way:
- I've gone through and given the article a copy edit. I've also added fact and weasel word tags where appropriate.
- One section extremely lacking in this article is any discussion of the history of studying whale song. As a reader, that's one question that needs to be answered for this to be an FA: How did the study of whale song start? What form does it take today? Who studies it? To what end?
- What does the clause "This is included with or in comparison with music" mean? It's so convoluted that it's incomprehensible.
- I don't know about the accuracy of the statement "Smell also is limited, as molecules diffuse more slowly in water than in air". What about the famous ability of sharks to sense blood in water at a very low concentration?
- An explanation is needed as to why a cutaway view of a dolphin head is used to explain whale song.
- Existing citations need to be checked for consistency in form and completeness.
- In the toothed whale section, dolphins are used as an example. While I understand why that's the case, the article is about whale song, not cetacean mammal song.
- The sound levels tables don't have enough standalone information and should be incorporated into their respective main sections. It's good information, but unless more prose is added to each section, it's not enough to be separate.
- What tools are used in the study of whale song? What structure does modern scientific research take? Who does it?
- In addition to the above expansion suggestions, I highly suggest a section covering the way whale songs have influenced popular culture and media. The most obvious example is Star Trek IV, but I know that numerous composers and musical artists also have been influenced by whale song.
- The information about sensory drawbacks given in the lede should be repeated and expanded in the "reasons for whale song" section. Otherwise, it should be cited.
- This article needs a lot of work. In fact, I'd venture to say that it's the worst article I've run across in my limited time here at FAC. Only a dedicated editor willing to devote large amounts of time to this article will be successful in resolving the issues I've raised and preserving the article. JKBrooks85 (talk) 11:10, 13 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Fixed.
Images and songs need alt text as per WP:ALT.Eubulides (talk) 08:24, 16 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
FARC commentary
[edit]- Suggested FA criteria concern are citations, alt text, structure, prose, comprehensiveness, focus. Also note the recent change to WP:WIAFA (1c) requiring "high-quality" sources. FAQ?
- Delist, per concerns listed above. JKBrooks85 (talk) 06:00, 28 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- I ask for some more time. I have little time to do work right now, but I'm trying to fit some in. ceranthor 00:20, 29 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Drop me a line when you've got it changed so I can remove my note. :) JKBrooks85 (talk) 11:23, 29 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- I have fixed the alt text, so that's one FA concern gone (not the most important one, admittedly). I suggest giving Ceranthor a bit more time. Eubulides (talk) 17:13, 29 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Is this being worked up in a hard drive? I haven't seen anything for three weeks. YellowMonkey (cricket photo poll!) paid editing=POV 07:07, 5 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- I have fixed the alt text, so that's one FA concern gone (not the most important one, admittedly). I suggest giving Ceranthor a bit more time. Eubulides (talk) 17:13, 29 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Drop me a line when you've got it changed so I can remove my note. :) JKBrooks85 (talk) 11:23, 29 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Delist, per FA criteria concerns. Cirt (talk) 03:14, 6 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Delist per above concerns. If Ceranthor gets time to significantly improve this, I'll be happy to give it a more in-depth look. Dabomb87 (talk) 14:55, 7 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment - It appears there is too much for me to fix it in time, I will make slow progress, I guess, and re-nominate at FAC. I disagree with the popular culture section. Perhaps an influence section instead? ceranthor 12:18, 9 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.