Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Thopha saccata/archive1
- 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 not promoted by Ian Rose 10:01, 4 March 2014 (UTC) [1].[reply]
Thopha saccata[edit]
Thopha saccata (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
- Featured article candidates/Thopha saccata/archive1
- Featured article candidates/Thopha saccata/archive2
Toolbox |
---|
This article is small and concise - has everything the layperson could want to know about this critter. 99of9 and I will answer issues promptly - so have at it. Cheers, Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 05:55, 11 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
- So what is it? "Thopha saccata, commonly known as the double drummer, is a species of cicada native to Queensland and New South Wales." That's what. Johnbod (talk) 23:24, 30 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
- Sigh - I guess easter egg links are lousy at attracting reviewers... Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 00:06, 31 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Feedback from Curly Turkey[edit]
Feel free to disagree with any of the silly comments this non-expert may make.
- Why the parentheses for "Cicada saccata (Fabricius, 1803)" but not for "Tettigonia saccata Fabricius, 1803"
- As per Author citation (zoology), the unparenthesed combination was the original, while all subsequent ones need the brackets Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 13:36, 11 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
- "the ‘double drums’—that": should that not be in double quotes? (MOS:QUOTEMARKS)
- "The genus name is derived from thoph (Hebrew: תּוֹף) "drum".": does this mean they gave it the genus name?
- "of any insect on earth": "on earth" can be taken for granted
- ""almost unbearable"": can this not be rephrased rather than quoted?
- For this and the strident shrieking, I think quotes are quite a good way to relate qualitative observations without imposing our own adjectives. But I'd be happy to see a suggestion - perhaps I don't properly understand your suggestion. --99of9 (talk) 10:10, 11 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
- I thought the original wording was pretty vivid and memorable, which is why I left it in quoted. Happy to hear if anyone thinks of some other wording. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 13:41, 11 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
- I don't disagree, but quotations are supposed to be attributed, and I thought a rewording might be better than an "according to" in this case. Curly Turkey (gobble) 21:54, 11 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
- "While underground the nymphs are susceptible to fungal disease.": I had to read this three or four times before I could parse it—move "while underground" to the end?
- "in an often extensive 'catacomb',": again, shouldn't this be double quotes?
- "class with their "strident shrieking"": again, can this not be rephrased to avoid the quotation?
Image review[edit]
- All the images are on Commons and appear to be appropriately tagged and licenced, including one from 1885 that has fallen into the public domain and another created by one of the nominators. Curly Turkey (gobble) 08:25, 11 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
- Alt text would be nice, but not an FAC requirement apparently.
- MOS:IMAGELOCATION says left-aligned images that start a section can cause readers problems, though apparently some editors disagree.
Ref check[edit]
I've only checked formatting—haven't visited the sources themselves.
- Inconsistency in page range formatting: "227–233" for Ref#2, "225–38" for Ref #6 & all others
- The natural history of Sydney, On biomimetics, Australian insects: a natural history should be in title case
- "(Sydney, NSW : 1895 – 1930)", "The Sydney Morning Herald (NSW : 1842 – 1954)", "The Mail (Adelaide, SA : 1912 – 1954)", "(Rockhampton, Qld. : 1878 – 1954)", "The Brisbane Courier (Qld. : 1864 – 1933)", "The Catholic Press (NSW : 1895 – 1942)": drop the spaces around the endash and before the colon. Why these date ranges?
———Curly Turkey (gobble) 08:25, 11 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Support. It looks like all my concerns have be taken care of. Sorry it took me a while to return to the review. Curly Turkey (gobble) 03:05, 23 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This is a WikiCup nomination. The following nominators are WikiCup participants: Casliber. To the nominator: if you do not intend to submit this article at the WikiCup, feel free to remove this notice. UcuchaBot (talk) 00:01, 12 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Closing comment -- Sorry Cas, but with only one in-depth review in a month and a half, we'll have to call it a day and try again some other time... Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 12:10, 3 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
- Closing note: This candidate has been archived, but there may be a delay in bot processing of the close. Please see WP:FAC/ar, and leave the {{featured article candidates}} template in place on the talk page until the bot goes through. Ian Rose (talk) 12:11, 3 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.