- 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 via FACBot (talk) 08:15, 19 June 2017 [1].
- Nominator(s): Sabine's Sunbird talk 04:51, 27 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Another WP:BIRD nomination and another esoteric small rail (we do so love them on the project). Hopefully you'll enjoy the story of its discovery, and the variety of images we're grateful people have released on Wikipedia friendly licences or such a hard to see species. Just passed WP:GAN. Sabine's Sunbird talk 04:51, 27 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
As always, some quick comments and if I stop the review and all comments of mine are either done or have an explanation as to why they are not done, feel free to disregard this or count this as a weak support.
- Maybe change the section entitled "Discovery and description" to something else, as a normal reader would think that you will include the actual description (plumage, voice, etc.) in that section.
- I thought about that during the development of the article but decided it was fine. I've changed it now... Sabine's Sunbird talk 19:58, 27 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
- The first paragraph in the Evolution and taxonomy section, "Prior to its collection it had been assumed by Thomson that the species was close to the other 'island hens' known in the Atlantic, possibly a gallinule, but on examination Lowe felt 'compelled to refer it to a new genus'. The generic name Atlantisia was named for the fabled island of Atlantis, destroyed by volcano. The specific name rogersi honours the Rev. Rogers who collected and sent the first specimens of the species to Lowe," feels like it would do better in the section above it. And honestly, one should likely just make the section above "Discovery" and then merge the description part of it with the taxonomy section.
- It originally was up there but as it was taking about its placement in the rail family I felt t was better here and I stand by that. Sabine's Sunbird talk 19:58, 27 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
- I see now. Looks good. RileyBugz会話投稿記録 16:35, 29 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
- Instead of saying "destroyed by a volcano" in the sentence "The generic name Atlantisia was named for the fabled island of Atlantis, destroyed by volcano," it might be better to say "supposedly destroyed by a volcano", as the current sentence implies that it was in fact destroyed by a volcano, and in fact did exist.
- I've changed the fabled island to mythical island which should make it explicit that it didn't exist. Sabine's Sunbird talk 19:58, 27 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
- I'm not talking about that, I'm talking about the fact that there is an implied contradicting statement in "destroyed by volcano". Also, you might want to add "a" before volcano. RileyBugz会話投稿記録 16:35, 29 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
- I feel that the preceding words stating that the words to those make it explicit that this is mythical. An event happening to a mythical place is itself obviously legendary. Sabine's Sunbird talk 05:12, 30 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
That is all for now, I will return with more later. RileyBugz会話投稿記録 16:00, 27 May 2017 (UTC)
And more:[reply]
-
- That's fine. It is pretty easy, just create the page User:Sabine's Sunbird/common.js and then paste the script (you can view how I have it on my page) on the page. RileyBugz会話投稿記録 14:03, 31 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
- Since you use just "IUCN" in the status section, you should probably indicate the abbreviation of IUCN in the lead (what I mean is you should put "IUCN" in parentheses in the lead right after its full name). RileyBugz会話投稿記録 01:00, 30 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Saw the title, thought it was the world's most pointless transport system. Good article - congratulations getting pictures of such literally inaccessible birds. A few comments:
- @WolfmanSF and Smurrayinchester: I'm impressed that you saw thought of it and managed to find a reference. Full disclosure, I spent 5 years on a (failed) PhD examining among other things the effects of isolation on insular birds... In the time that I saw this and me getting back from work WolfmanSF added the text. That was nice, but I'm going to remove it and I don't think it should be the article (I'll transcribe this to the talk page of the article too). My reasoning is thus:
- Foster's rule is generally applied to closely related taxa. You'd say make a comparison between members of the same genus or closely related genera. This makes sense, as animals exhibit ranges of sizes so one best describes a species unusual size in relation to closely related species (Is an aardvark a giant or a dwarf? Who knows?). This species is monotypic and its closest relatives are uncertain and considerable time has passed since it diverged from them so in that regards the application of Foster's rule to this species is problematic.
- With regards to its closest relatives as currently understood, the genus Laterallus is itself tiny and mouselike. The black rail and Junin crake are comparable in size if not slightly smaller, and the other members of the genus are around the same size or very slightly larger. So if the species is roughly the same size as their relatives, how can they be a good example of insular dwarfism? I would guess that the suggestion that they are an example of insular dwarfs is based on an earlier taxonomy?
- Finally, Foster's rule would suggest that small species get larger on islands, not smaller. This obviously didn't happen either.
- I don't think it's worth even including it as a "it has been suggested that it is an example of". I don't wish to disparage the book, but in the context of this species the book is not a reliable source (even if it's otherwise good). Sabine's Sunbird talk 04:43, 29 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
- "the genus Mundia was erected" - Are genuses really "erected"? (If that's a standard term, ignore this).
- "and a red eye." - "red eyes"? (If it's normal to refer to the eyes in the singular, ignore this too)
- "The Inaccessible Island rail is territorial, although given the high densities of the birds the boundaries may be loose and flexible." This doesn't make sense to me, and it seems to be contradicted a couple of sentences later by the claim that the birds frequently confront each other about boundaries.
- " The scientists responsible for the study speculated that the low BMR was not as a result of flightlessness, as flightlessness does not result in this in other bird species, [...] A comparison of flighted and flightless rails, including the Inaccessible Island rail, found that rails that lose the ability to fly also have low BMRs" - Seems to contradict itself?
- "The foraging method used by the Inaccessible Island rail is slow and deliberate and has been compared to that of a mouse. In fact the species has actually been compared ecologically to a mouse as well." This would probably would work better as a single sentence, and a link to ecological niche might help explain what "compared ecologically" actually means.
-
- Looks good! Questions have been answered, so Support. Smurrayinchester 08:07, 29 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I agree, it's remarkable that we have so many high-quality photos of this very "inaccessible" bird (I wouldn't complain if you removed File:Atlantisia rogersi russ.jpg given the extremely low resolution of that image compared to all the others, but I won't insist upon it). I'll read through and list any comments or questions as I go along...
- By 1955 it was accepted that it was the descendent of flying ancestors that had reached Inaccessible Island a long time ago – the writing is generally clear and engaging, but this took me a couple passes to parse properly. Is there any way to reword, or at least tighten, it? Also, according to wikt:descendant#Usage notes, it should be spelled "descendant" with an a in this case.
- The most recent study to include the genus, in 1998, compared the morphology of the rails and other Gruiformes placed it in the crake clade, subtribe Crecina. – Seems like there's a missing connecting word here.
- Males are larger and weigh more than females – "and weigh more than" → "and heavier than"?
- was not as a result of flightlessness, as flightlessness does not result in this in other bird species – A little clunky. I'd suggest "was not as a result of flightlessness, which does not have this effect in other bird species".
- at all altitudes, from 449 m (1,473 ft). – I'm not sure what is meant here.
- "tussock-grass" is sometimes hyphenated and sometimes not. Is this deliberate?
- I think it would be useful to mention the size/area of Inaccessible Island so we get the full context.
- but has not been found in the short dry grasses on the cinder cones (but the scientists making the observations cautioned that this does not mean that they never use the habitat). – Try to avoid the recursive "but".
- The territories in the tussock-grass habitats around Blenden Hall [...] extending to 0.01–0.04 ha (0.025–0.099 acres). – Should this just be "extend"?
- encounters between families and individuals frequent and encounters and territorial calling are common. – Nothing wrong here, but it might be nice to avoid three uses of "and" so close together.
- On meeting confrontations – I believe a comma is needed here for clarity.
- an introduced species of centipede forms an important part of their diet. – Do we know which one?
- by this Tristan da Cunha Island Council in 1994 – "this" → "the"?
I think that's about it. Overall, a very interesting and informative article. The writing is generally sound, but I got tripped up in a few places as described above. Once these points are addressed, I'll be happy to support. – Juliancolton | Talk 14:48, 29 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Support and comments from Jim[edit]
I'm happy to support, just a couple of niggles Jimfbleak - talk to me? 07:17, 2 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
pro-Rallus?— I'd have expected proto-Rallus; please strike this comment if the source says pro-Rallus
The sentence beginning The Ascension crake (Mundia elpenor)... seems a little convoluted, I had to read it twice
0.01–0.04 ha (0.025–0.099 acres) conversion to hundredths of an acre seems over-precise
-
current ref 12's (Taylor and Sharp) formatting is inconsistent with the rest of the references - I assume this is a journal article or article in a book collection?
- It had done it that way because the citation template is obnoxious about displaying editors if there is more than one author on web pages. I have simply eliminated the editors, which isn't ideal but what can you do? Sabine's Sunbird talk 20:05, 2 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
- I randomly googled three sentences and nothing showed up except mirrors. Earwig's tool shows no copyright violations.
- Otherwise everything looks good. Ealdgyth - Talk 11:11, 2 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
- Thanks for the source review. Sabine's Sunbird talk 20:30, 2 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Image review - seems I'm a bit late for the game, so I'll do the image review. All the sourcing and licensing looks good, but this image[2] has a pretty strange double infobox template, which could be merged into one. FunkMonk (talk) 14:17, 2 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
-
- Thanks for the image review. Sabine's Sunbird talk 20:30, 2 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Calls:
- "They also make a variety of calls while incubating, including trilling calls and particularly when pairs swapped placed during incubation." I think there may be a grammar mistake or missing or extra word in the second half of this sentence, as I couldn't quite follow what it is supposed to mean. Moisejp (talk) 04:59, 17 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
-
-
Morphology:
- "Males are larger and heavier than females, weighing 35–49 g (1.2–1.7 oz) (average 40.5 g (1.43 oz)), compared to 34–42 g (1.2–1.5 oz) (average 37 g (1.3 oz)) in females." Having two sets of opened and closed parentheses directly side by side feels a little bit awkward. Possibly dashes or commas could be used somewhere in there to substitute for some of the parentheses? But if that doesn't work, or if the side-by-side parentheses really don't bother you at all, then no worries.
Breeding:
- "The nests are domed and oval or pear shaped, with the entrances near the narrow end of the nest. From the entrance of the nest an entrance track or tunnel can go up to half a metre from the nest. The nests are typically built entirely of the same material the nest is found in; for example tussock leaves or sedges. Where tussock leaves are used larger leaves are used on the outside and finer leaves are used to line the nest." There is a really a lot of repetition of words in these four sentences, especially the words "nest", "entrance", "leaves", and "used". If possible, it would be nice to reduce the repetition at least a little, perhaps by restructuring the sentences, and/or using pronouns or synonyms. The final sentence is where I would most strongly urge you to try to do something, although the other sentences could be touched as well.
Those are all of my comments, thanks. Moisejp (talk) 17:24, 18 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you, Sabine's Sunbird. I'm now happy to support. Moisejp (talk) 03:42, 19 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.
![[2]](/en/File:Nesocichla_eremita_-Inaccessible_Island,_cropped.jpg){kind=link}