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 SandyGeorgia 23:54, 3 April 2011 [1].

---

Akodon spegazzinii[edit]

Akodon spegazzinii (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

• Featured article candidates/Akodon spegazzinii/archive1

Toolbox
Analysis Citation bot External links

Nominator(s): Ucucha 15:00, 21 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I started writing about this Argentinean rodent because we had articles about several different species that recently turned out to be the same as this one, and I felt that our article should make clear why all those supposed species are invalid. I then decided to take the article a step further and make it as comprehensive as I could. Dana boomer has provided a useful GA review and I hope it will now be found worthy to be a featured article. Ucucha 15:00, 21 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Source review

• Pardinas or Pardiñas?
  • I'm following the spelling used in the sources here; the Red List gives him as "Pardinas" (as a matter of fact, it always omits diacritics) and the other sources correctly spell his name "Pardiñas". I'm not sure whether there's any convention about changing the spelling used for the author within a work, but would be happy to submit to any consensus. I think I once noticed a similar problem with Colin Groves: on some of his papers, his name is "Colin Groves", on others it is "Colin P. Groves". Ucucha 22:22, 21 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• Bibliographic information for Díaz and Barquez, 2007?
  • Added. Ucucha 22:22, 21 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• Number of pages for book sources is not required; however, for consistency they should be included for all or for none
  • Added. Ucucha 22:22, 21 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• What is SAREM? Nikkimaria (talk) 15:16, 21 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Thanks again for checking my sloppiness. SAREM is the Sociedad Argentina para el Estudio de los Mamíferos. However, its name is pretty much always abbreviated, so I'd like to keep it as "SAREM". Ucucha 22:22, 21 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Dabs and deads

• No dabs, but the two scielo links are dead Jimfbleak - talk to me? 15:31, 21 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • They seem to work now. The SCIELO website is rather shaky. Ucucha 22:22, 21 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• Support Comments Jimfbleak - talk to me? 15:45, 21 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• It is related to Akodon boliviensis — another, plural, subject has intervened since species last mentioned

• But the last sentence ends with "a single, widespread and variable species", which the "It" appropriately refers to. I'm open to a rewording, though.

• what about the swap Akodon spegazzinii is related to Akodon boliviensis and other members of the A. boliviensis species group. It reproduces...? Jimfbleak - talk to me? 06:30, 22 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• Yes, that's better. Ucucha 13:36, 22 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• The eyes are surrounded by a yellow ring — Of what? Fur, bare skin?

• Fur; clarified.

• spegazzinii has 40 chromosomes. — better placed after the physical data

• Done.

• Oldfield Thomas from Salta Province — Not a big deal, but adding something like "British zoologist" before the main players gives a little more info without following the link

• I think we discussed this a few times in various FACs, but I generally prefer to omit this information. The article mentions a lot of scientists, and adding "Argentinean zoologist" and "American zoologist" etcetera to all of them would add much information that is of no real relevance of Akodon spegazzinii, the subject of this article. Ucucha 22:22, 21 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• more reddish — redder?

• I slightly prefer the current wording, because they are reddish brown, not actually red. Ucucha 22:22, 21 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• temporal and lambdoid crests — These are red links, so can we be told where they are, or shown on a diagram?

• I think the context already makes that clear: they're crests on the braincase. Ucucha 22:22, 21 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• If all we know is that they are crests on the braincase, there is no point naming them. I can guess that temporal is on the temple, but no idea about lamboid. If there is no location, retaining the names is jargon for jargon's sake. Jimfbleak - talk to me? 06:30, 22 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• We still should name the specific structures, just as we name the specific people involved in the taxonomy. It's not jargon, but what the things are called: they have no non-jargon names. Ucucha 13:36, 22 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• continue to grow in adulthood — Indefinitely, or is there a maximum size or age?

• We don't know. Ucucha 22:22, 21 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• <www.iucnredlist.org > — what's the point of the strange formatting?

• It's how the IUCN asks for its list to be cited. Ucucha 22:22, 21 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• we are not bound by that, I've never used that format for iucn docs. It lacks consistency with all the other references in your excellent article Jimfbleak - talk to me? 06:30, 22 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• Well, none of the other references are web-only sources, so there's a little to be inconsistent with.

:*.Spanish language sources should be indicated as such

• Done. Thanks for the review! Ucucha 22:22, 21 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• I've changed to support, since no real problems. I've left two items unstruck, since I'd be interested to see if anyone else has views on those Jimfbleak - talk to me? 19:05, 22 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by Sasata (talk) 22:38, 27 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• Support—Looks good, meets FA criteria. Sasata (talk) 23:36, 27 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• if the species only occurs in Northwestern Argentina, how can it be considered "widespread" and "widely-distributed"? Or should the lead sentence say that it was "originally found"?
  • Pardiñas et al. (2011) repeatedly call this species "widespread". Relative to other species in its group, such as Akodon sylvanus, it actually is. Also, in this context, "a single, widespread species" contrasts with the alternative of ~5 species with more restricted ranges. Ucucha 23:13, 27 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• link species group?
  • Done.
• what year was Spegazzini's original collection?
  • Summer of 1896–7. Added.
• "but from 1932 it became associated" from->in
  • Used a different wording.
• "the treatment of these species in systematic works" I'd link systematics here, newbies probably won't know what this means otherwise
  • Done.
• "Meanwhile, Carlos Galliari and Pardiñas had recognized Akodon leucolimnaeus as a true Akodon, not a Necromys, in 1995." publication/citation?
  • I haven't seen the paper; it's some kind of meeting abstract.
• "… named Akodon minoprioi in a presentation." what kind of "presentation"?
  • At the Primeras Jornadas de Ciencias Naturales del Litoral in Santa Fe.
• any suitable link for "molecular characters"?
  • Not really. Molecular biology is too broad and molecular phylogenetics too narrow.
• "According to phylogenetic analysis of the mitochondrial cytochrome b gene," maybe a little better to say gene sequences (and link sequences). Similarly, perhaps "data" in the cladogram caption should be "gene sequences"?
  • Done.
• "The color of the feet ranges from white via yellow-brown to gray." I've never seen via used this way, but I guess if one of its meanings is "through", it's ok.
  • Got rid of it anyway; "and" seems better here instead of "via".
• "hairs are grayish brown" hyphen
  • Done.
• "… tend to have more hairy ears and tails." more hairy->hairier (unless they really do have more than 2 ears and 1 tail)
  • You think rodents have only two ears and one tail? Tsk. (Changed.)
• "Akodon polopi, however, has even better developed crests." needs hyphen, but I'm not sure "better" is the best word choice here. Same thing 2 sentences later.
  • And also a paragraph or so up. Perhaps I could use "more well-developed" here, but I'm pretty sure I've used that before and someone changed it to this.
• any link for "cloud grassland"?
  • I don't think so. Yungas is linked, though, and these cloud grasslands are part of the Yungas.
• "A number of sigmodontines have been recorded alongside A. spegazzinii" could you clarify "recorded alongside"? Does this mean they have overlapping ranges?
  • Reworded.
• you might want to put non-breaking spaces in your refs after p.'s and fig.'s
  • Done. Thanks for your review! Ucucha 23:13, 27 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Image review: This one's easy. One range map, easily checks out fine. I will be doing a full article review shortly. – VisionHolder « talk » 02:20, 3 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Comments: Excellent as always. Here are my nitpicks:

• "IUCN Red List" in the lead—on my FACs, I always get told to expand the acronym on first use, so I guess we should be consistent here.
  • But the thing is called the "IUCN Red List", never the "International Union for Conservation of Nature Red List", as far as I am aware. Ucucha 03:43, 3 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    • I guess I need to start using that explanation on my FACs then. – VisionHolder « talk » 04:37, 3 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• "The proliferation of scientific names for this one species occurred because of the terseness of the original description of A. spegazzinii and the lack of large samples and appreciation of the substantial variation occurring within A. spegazzinii."—I think you need a comma in here: ...and...and... If not, the sentence may need to be restructured.
  • Edited slightly. Ucucha 03:43, 3 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• Since "lambdoid crests" is red-linked, is it possible to give a brief description?
  • They're crests on the braincase; I don't think anything else will really be useful. Ucucha 03:43, 3 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• A shot in the dark, but any listing under CITES?
  • No; I don't think the trade in little grass mice is of any concern. Ucucha 03:43, 3 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    • I figured as much, but always good to check. – VisionHolder « talk » 04:37, 3 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Other than that, I'm looking forward to supporting soon. Good job! – VisionHolder « talk » 02:50, 3 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the review! Ucucha 03:43, 3 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Support: My concerns have been addressed. I'm glad to add my support. – VisionHolder « talk » 04:37, 3 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.