Talk:Aptostichus barackobamai/GA1

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

Reviewer: Grungaloo (talk · contribs) 03:23, 8 January 2024 (UTC)

Hi, I'm going to take this review on. I should have some comments for you in a few days, I'll ping you again when I'm finished! grungaloo (talk) 03:23, 8 January 2024 (UTC)


 * Hi, I'm all finished. This is another great article, only a few issues to be addressed. I have some comments about some of the prose, and the lead needs a bit more in it. Let me know once you've had a chance to take a look and let me know if you have any questions. Thanks! grungaloo (talk) 02:09, 9 January 2024 (UTC)
 * , that should be everything. Thanks for the review!! 🏵️ Etrius ( Us) 04:22, 10 January 2024 (UTC)
 * It all looks great, thanks! I'm happy to promote this article. Thanks for all your work on this, and congrats on another GA! grungaloo (talk) 20:34, 10 January 2024 (UTC)


 * GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)


 * 1) It is reasonably well written.
 * a (prose, spelling, and grammar): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):
 * See comments Issues addressed
 * 1) It is factually accurate and verifiable.
 * a (reference section): b (inline citations to reliable sources):  c (OR):  d (copyvio and plagiarism):
 * Available references check out, scientific papers have relevant information. Plagiarism not detected, no OR.
 * 1) It is broad in its coverage.
 * a (major aspects): b (focused):
 * Very limited sources, but good coverage of those sources. Appropriate amount of detail.
 * 1) It follows the neutral point of view policy.
 * Fair representation without bias:
 * Meets NPOV
 * 1) It is stable.
 * No edit wars, etc.:
 * Only recent revert was to fix vandalism, no indication of edit warring.
 * 1) It is illustrated by images and other media, where possible and appropriate.
 * a (images are tagged and non-free content have non-free use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
 * Images are appropriately captioned and licensed.
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass/Fail:
 * Pass

Comments

 * I did some minor copyediting, mostly missing commas or words. Feel free to doublecheck my edits.
 * Thanks!!!


 * Lead should include a brief description of what it looks like, maybe add a bit more about the behavior or breeding, and something about their habitat/microhabitat.
 * ✅ added a sentence about appearance, and another about breeding.


 * LiveScience source is a bit questionable - given what it's being used to cite it's fine, but I have seen some questionable pseudo-science content on there. You might be able to use the original Bond paper for that citation since it gives the species names and who they're named after.
 * ✅, I added the original paper to the citation but left the LiveScience citation in as well since it's more direct.


 * - Drop located, sounds odd in reference to taxonomic families.
 * ✅, its a bad habit of mine


 * - The second clause could be simplified to something like "may of which are also named after famous individuals".


 * - The second clause could drop the species since that's repeating whats in the primary clause.


 * - Specify Transverse Ranges in California - the location hasn't been mentioned in this section.


 * - backed up by sounds off, try saying along with an instead.


 * - Are these two clauses related? It's not clear why going without feeding is related to breeding. This could be rewritten so the connection is clearer - or separated to two sentences if they're not.


 * - Drop species, overall from the end of the sentence.