Talk:American crocodile/GA1

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

I actually quick failed this, but realised it didn't meet the criteria, so I'm going to review this. I don't think it's anywhere near GA yet for the following reasons:
 * lead does not summarise article, see Lead section
 * Final step after everything else is completed.


 * The species was scientifically recognized in 1875 Not true, Cuvier named the species in 1807 according to the taxobox, and not from a US specimen
 * Someone fixed this up!


 * No taxonomy section - does it have any relatives? Subspecies? Etymology of binomial name?
 * Etymology is non-notable. Someone else added a taxonomy sect.


 * How does it differ from the American Alligator or other New world crocodiles? Nothing to tell me here
 * How many teeth? when does it feed? (night mostly)
 * Really the same as all other crocs. Not needed on the species level.


 * Why is size not a physical characteristic? What is its colour? Does it vocalise?
 * Size is a subsection of phys. It can vocalize as a hatchling, like all other crocs.


 * Number and size of eggs? Where are they laid?
 * Really about the same as most crocs. Not needed on the species level.


 * Heavy US bias. Why is the tiny Florida population given its own section? Why is the US population given separate sizes? No attacks on humans by the American crocodile have been reported in the United States. so what? What is its protection status outside the US? CITES status?
 * I think the bias is because it is the only place where alligatorids and crocodylids share a range. That US attacks line should probably be removed.


 * The American crocodile is a vulnerable species in the United States ref for this is iucn, which is international, not US status
 * Fixed.


 * It is thought that this intolerance to cold is the reason why American crocodiles never spread as far northward as the alligators. source?
 * whole article needs a copy edit, veers between singular and plural. recorded as high as 4.6 metres are they flying or just standing vertically? and attacks Mexico - really? Species in the United States cohabitate a range... what?
 * ref formatting needs checking per MOS, including at least two bare http refs
 * Will go through refs with a fine-toothed comb after all other ducks are in a row.

Given the amount that needs doing, I would suggest withdrawing this from GAN, since I think there's too much to do in a week to bring it up to the mark. jimfbleak (talk) 09:51, 15 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Great suggestions. Thank you for looking at this! StevePrutz (talk) 21:22, 18 December 2008 (UTC)


 * On taxonomy, I thought that acutus is closer to the other three American crocs than to the Asian ones, with Nile Crocodile somewhere in between. Isn't that worth saying? I don't know if there are subspecies or not. Isn't any of this worth mentioning? I wouldn't think that for GA, and certainly not for FA, that you should expect readers to know that number of eggs, teeth etc are the same for all crocs (I didn't) and then expect them to look it up jimfbleak (talk) 16:01, 19 December 2008 (UTC)
 * I'll try to dig up some papers on taxonomy/phylogeny. I get your point about saying "no subspecies", now. I don't think the teeth and egg count are important for an encyclopedia article, but I could be wrong. At this point, it might be a few months before I can get it up to GA. Is there a special way to de-nominate it? StevePrutz (talk) 16:35, 19 December 2008 (UTC)
 * I think you just take it off the list, along with my review tag. I'm no reptile expert, but I've written a lot of GA/FA articles, so let me know if there's anything I can help with. Have a look at existing reptile GA and FA articles too, if you haven't already done so. I think that there is enough on this croc to eventually make a GA and then FA article, but it needs a lot of work to get there, good luck jimfbleak (talk) 07:56, 20 December 2008 (UTC)

Let's add: "Despite its proximity to Hispaniola, the American crocodile is not found in Puerto Rico." yet the distribution map clearly shows Puerto Rico in GREEN!!!!!! AHHHHH!!!!!!! OMG-Wikipedia is WRONG!!! AHHHHHH, again!!!!!!!!! 71.222.85.2 (talk) 06:40, 10 December 2010 (UTC) 71.222.85.2 (talk) 06:40, 10 December 2010 (UTC) 71.222.85.2 (talk) 06:40, 10 December 2010 (UTC) ``71.222.85.2 (talk) 06:40, 10 December 2010 (UTC) 06:40, 10 December 2010 (UTC) 06:40, 10 December 2010 (UTC)06:40, 10 December 2010 (UTC)06:40, 10 December 2010 (UTC)06:40, 10 December 2010 (UTC)