Talk:African river martin/GA1

GA Review
The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.''

Reviewer: MMagdalene722  talk to me  16:25, 1 December 2009 (UTC)

GA Review by MMagdalene722
I'll go ahead and review this one, too, since I just passed the River martin article. MMagdalene722 talk to me  16:25, 1 December 2009 (UTC)

Good article criteria  :
 * (a) ; and
 * I've made some minor copy edits. If you're satisfied with them, I'll go ahead and clear the article for GA.   MMagdalene722  talk to me  14:00, 2 December 2009 (UTC)
 * (b).
 * The only thing I would add would be a sentence or two in the lead about the bird's status, so that it better reflects the content of the article body.
 * I've added a sentence to this effect
 * Alrighty then.  MMagdalene722  talk to me  13:46, 2 December 2009 (UTC)

:
 * (a) ;
 * (b) and
 * (c).

:
 * (a) ; and
 * (b).

. . :
 * (a) ; and
 * (b)



Other comments: I noticed that a lot of the material here is repeated from the River martin article. This is understandable, since the African River Martin is (obviously) a type of River Martin. I also noticed that the White-eyed River Martin is already a GA. I'm not really very experienced as a WP, but is there enough information on each of the two birds not included in the River Martin article to warrant having separate articles for the two species? I just wasn't sure. I'm not really a subject matter or anything
 * It's policy in all the biology projects to have articles on every species and higher taxon, and for the Bird project, all the species' articles actually exist. As you say, there's bound to be significant overlap, particular for a genus with only two members, but I've tried to put in different material where it's possible. It would be easier to differentiate with a larger grouping, like the 400 tyrant flycatchers, but that's too daunting! 08:08, 2 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Okay, just clarifying. MMagdalene722  talk to me  13:46, 2 December 2009 (UTC)

GA Pass/Fail: Pass