Talk:Bigfin reef squid/GA1

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

Reviewer: Sasata (talk · contribs) 17:03, 9 October 2011 (UTC)

I will review this article. Comments in a few days. Sasata (talk) 17:03, 9 October 2011 (UTC)

I will cheekily nip in and add a few comments before Sasata has had a chance. I hope I will be forgiven. --Stemonitis (talk) 18:03, 9 October 2011 (UTC)
 * You are forgiven for making my work easier. I'll add my review after the nominator has had the chance to address these comments. Sasata (talk) 18:18, 9 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Heh. Thanks. Some quick replies below. Will continue working on the suggestions one by one tomorrow. Too sleepy atm (3AM :P).--  Obsidi ♠ n   Soul   20:20, 9 October 2011 (UTC)


 * German spelling rules dictate that it should be "Großflossen-Riffkalmar", not "Gross-".
 * ✅ --  Obsidi ♠ n   Soul   20:20, 9 October 2011 (UTC)


 * Species synoymy should not be hidden, and probably should be discussed in the text. How did naturalists (e.g. Quoy & Gaimard) come to describe so many species if there is so little variation between populations ("cryptic species")?
 * ✅ Unhidden. It was originally there because it took up much of the space on the right side when I first started the expansion and the article was still short. I'll try to add a paragraph or two explaining the large number of synonyms tomorrow.--  Obsidi ♠ n   Soul   20:20, 9 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Check out Fomes fomentarius to see the code for a handy little show/hide box to use in the taxobox when the synonyms list becomes disruptively lengthy. Sasata (talk) 20:44, 9 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Heh, it's actually basically the same code as the one I just removed. :P So should I leave it in? --  Obsidi ♠ n   Soul   20:55, 9 October 2011 (UTC)
 * WP:COLLAPSE is pretty clear that encyclopaedic content should not be collapsed just to save space. If the synonymy were reproduced in full in the text, then it would be acceptable to have it collapsed in the taxobox (although I would then remove it entirely, I think). As long as it isn't, it shouldn't be hidden. --Stemonitis (talk) 06:36, 10 October 2011 (UTC)
 * The synonymy should definitely be discussed in the main text, and when it is, it is acceptable to have the synonym list condensed in the taxobox per WP:Collapse, "Collapsible sections or cells may be used in tables that consolidate information covered in the main text, navboxes, infoboxes, or chess puzzles." Sasata (talk) 14:22, 10 October 2011 (UTC)
 * It's not a problem anymore, as the article is long enough. Anyway added a brief discussion of taxonomic history and its status as a cryptic species complex.--  Obsidi ♠ n   Soul   14:07, 11 October 2011 (UTC)


 * Use a single variant of English consistently, probably Australian English (= BrE) given its chiefly Australian / NZ / Indian etc. distribution, with only a tiny part of the United States included.
 * I can't. :/ I don't even know which words I should change, heh. If it helps, it's also native in my country - the Philippines. And our English dialect is based on American English.--  Obsidi ♠ n   Soul   20:20, 9 October 2011 (UTC)
 * There are lists available (User:SpNeo/Spelling Guide, American and British English spelling differences), but ones I've seen in this article are as follows: --Stemonitis (talk) 06:36, 10 October 2011 (UTC)


 * ✅ I think. --  Obsidi ♠ n   Soul   07:01, 10 October 2011 (UTC)


 * Is this a reliable source? It's written by an undergraduate, and the writing isn't great, which makes me wonder how reliable the (unreferenced) information is.
 * Hmm... true. That reference is actually inherited from the original stub article before I started expansion. But I think you're right. I'll try to replace it with other sources and remove those I can't verify.--  Obsidi ♠ n   Soul   20:20, 9 October 2011 (UTC)
 * ✅ Replaced what can be verified in other sources. Removed what can't.--  Obsidi ♠ n   Soul   08:04, 10 October 2011 (UTC)


 * It would be good (but not a GA requirement) to mark the foreign languages in the Taxonomy section (and the Greek in the Description) using lang.
 * Or the "language=" parameter in the citation templates. Sasata (talk) 20:51, 9 October 2011 (UTC)
 * ✅ Although I had to exclude Malayalam as it is not written in Malayalam script. Foreign language sources already have a  param with them as well.--   Obsidi ♠ n   Soul   06:37, 10 October 2011 (UTC)


 * Shouldn't the etymology be included under Taxonomy and nomenclature, rather than under Description?
 * ✅ Moved.--  Obsidi ♠ n   Soul   06:37, 10 October 2011 (UTC)


 * You changed the spelling of "calamari" to "calamary", claiming that one is used for the animal, and one for the animal as food. I have never heard this distinction before, and it contradicts the cited source. I think it would be better to use "calamari" for both.
 * See Merriam-Webster definitions: Calamary ("squid") and Calamari ("squid used as food"). Calamary is English and has been used since 1567 as a synonym for "Squid". Calamari, on the other hand, is a loanword (probably American English) of Italian origin first used in 1961. Also note that there are more usage of Southern Calamary in academic papers than Southern Calamari. --  Obsidi ♠ n   Soul   20:20, 9 October 2011 (UTC)


 * Fix grammar: "The adult weight ranges between 403.5 to 1,415 g ..."
 * ✅--  Obsidi ♠ n   Soul   08:04, 10 October 2011 (UTC)


 * The first sentence of Coloration is ungrammatical: "The upper surfaces are densely covered in chromatophores, and more sparsely on the lower surface". I know what you're trying to say, but "more sparsely" does not refer to "upper surfaces" as the word order currently suggests.
 * ✅--  Obsidi ♠ n   Soul   08:04, 10 October 2011 (UTC)


 * "They are usually found within 0 to 100 m (0 to 330 ft) below the water's surface": remove "within".
 * ✅--  Obsidi ♠ n   Soul   08:04, 10 October 2011 (UTC)


 * You link to chemical change, but that article seems (it isn't clear) to refer to chemical reactions, while you are talking about other changes to the chemistry.
 * ✅ Removed the sentences on sensitivity to chemical change as they were based on the bioweb ref.--  Obsidi ♠ n   Soul   08:04, 10 October 2011 (UTC)


 * "‰" is not a unit, and so isn't separated by a space; "35‰", for instance, is merely a shorthand for "35/1000".
 * ✅ Per above--  Obsidi ♠ n   Soul   08:04, 10 October 2011 (UTC)


 * "Their original range extends ..." suggests that the range has changed. Has it?
 * Yes. As mentioned in the lead. It's a Lessepsian migrant.--  Obsidi ♠ n   Soul   20:23, 9 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Then that should be clarified in the context, I think. It may be enough just to run the two paragraphs together, but I think some re-wording would also help. Perhaps along the lines of "...Australia and New Zealand (42°N to 42°S and 32°E to 154°W). The range has also expanded to include parts of the Mediterranean Sea. In 2002, bigfin reef squids were first documented in the Gulf of İskenderun..." --Stemonitis (talk) 06:36, 10 October 2011 (UTC)
 * ✅--  Obsidi ♠ n   Soul   08:04, 10 October 2011 (UTC)


 * "... fish, prawns, and other crustaceans" suggests that fish are crustaceans.
 * ✅--  Obsidi ♠ n   Soul   08:04, 10 October 2011 (UTC)


 * The first two paragraphs of Hearing should be run together.
 * ✅--  Obsidi ♠ n   Soul   08:04, 10 October 2011 (UTC)


 * I have uploaded a reduced version of the video, at File:Sepioteuthis lessoniana 2010 300px.ogv, which should be used inline instead of the full-resolution version, although a link to the full version would be handy, too, probably in the caption.
 * Thanks. I'll fit that in.--  Obsidi ♠ n   Soul   20:20, 9 October 2011 (UTC)
 * ✅--  Obsidi ♠ n   Soul   08:04, 10 October 2011 (UTC)

Comments from a 1st readthrough. I'll go through it again later more closely to check citations, and do a literature search to make sure the "broad coverage" criterion is met. Sasata (talk) 19:59, 13 October 2011 (UTC)
 * lead looks too short in comparison to the length of the article
 * ✅ I hope it's long enough now.


 * "He reclassified the twelve species" I would expect "reclassified" to go to classification, so it's an easter-egg link. How about "He synonymised"?


 * "This was confirmed in genetic studies by Izuka et al. in 1994." citation for this study?
 * ✅ Sorry. I gave the wrong link in the citation. Fixed now. It's the same as the sentence following it - Triantafillos & Adams.


 * "The adults weigh 403.5 to 1,415 g (0.890 to 3.12 lb) for males" grammatical incorrect
 * ✅ Reworded again.


 * I don't think it's necessary to give imperial conversions with measurement values less than a millimetre
 * ✅ Removed.


 * short form binomials should have non-breaking space in them to prevent unsightly line breaks
 * "The strong, curved, and short beaks (rostrum)" should be plural (rostra)?


 * "lanceolate vane" jargon
 * ✅ Reworded, though I think there really is no other equivalent word for "lanceolate" without having to explain the shape itself.


 * sucker should be linked earlier


 * link/define papillae, keel, manus, dactylus
 * ✅ We don't have many articles tackling them in-depth. I opted for inline explanations instead. Linked manus and dactylus (which were already defined), reworded keel. Defined papillae.


 * "2 mm (0.079 in)" convert output should have same # of sig figs


 * "A prominent keel is present on the club" hasn't been explained what the "club" is


 * link mating display


 * "Whether bigfin reef squids recognise each other individually still remains unknown, however ." (imo)


 * "In 2009, bigfin reef squids and the common octopus (Octopus vulgaris) were studied" a minor point, but they were probably studied before then; the research was published in 2009
 * ✅ Reworded.


 * "Bigfin reef squids exhibit two    most common social body patterning" missing "of the"? Could the first three short paragraphs here be combined into one?
 * "Accentuated Gonads", "Spread Arms" (and others): are capitals necessary?
 * ✅ It was per the source, but I have removed them.


 * "This display may indicate reproductive condition." fix grammar
 * ✅ Hm... what's wrong with it? I have reworded it to "It may indicate the reproductive condition of the signalling squid."


 * "Instead of fish, fishermen now harvest bigfin reef squid." All of them?
 * ✅ Removed the sentence. The previous sentence on the fishing industry having to adapt should be enough.


 * retrieval dates aren't required for print-based sources
 * ✅ Removed


 * journal article titles should be consistently title case or sentence case; I like to have article titles in sentence case and book title in title case, but it doesn't really matter as long as it's consistent
 * ✅ Switched all journal article titles to sentence case. Retained title case in websites and books


 * "J. Gen. Physiol." -> journal titles should be consistently either abbreviated or not
 * ✅ Expanded all abbreviated journal titles


 * I'll come back and expand the lead later.--  Obsidi ♠ n   Soul   03:07, 14 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Ok, I've expanded the lead.--  Obsidi ♠ n   Soul   07:29, 15 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Hi, just wanted to say I'm still watching, but have been busy both on & off wiki. Will continue/wrap up review in the next day or three. Sasata (talk) 07:51, 18 October 2011 (UTC)
 * No worries, take as long as needed. :) Note this is my first GA nom, so I'm learning as much as I can with the corrections as well for future articles.--  Obsidi ♠ n   Soul   00:56, 20 October 2011 (UTC)

Images

 * I'm not sure I agree with the licensing of File:Sepioteuthis lessoniana.jpg; the source page indicates that it comes from here (although the page# is not given), but this was published in 1954 and so isn't old enough to be public domain.
 * I'm also wondering about File:Sepioteuthis lessoniana gladius.jpg; the uploader indicates "own work" as the source; metadata suggests it was a scan... I guess it could be a scan of a drawing he/she made, but if so, some more information about the source from which the drawing was made would be better. Sasata (talk) 16:03, 19 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Hmm... I'll try to track the images down later tonight and verify copyright. If they can't be found I'll try finding suitable illustrations from public domain/free sources or we'd probably have to remove them altogether.--  Obsidi ♠ n   Soul   00:55, 20 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Ugh, really busy the past days, will try to get some time set aside for this later tonight.--  Obsidi ♠ n   Soul   00:50, 25 October 2011 (UTC)

Final comments

 * I've spot-checked a few of the citations, and there were no problems. I'm satisified that the article meets the "broad coverage" criterion. There's a few more interesting & recent papers that might be added to further develop the article, but you're under no obligation to add these for GA; I'm listing them merely in case you or someone else desires to push this to FA.


 * Title: Chromatophore Activity during Natural Pattern Expression by the Squid Sepioteuthis lessoniana: Contributions of Miniature Oscillation
 * Author(s): Suzuki Mamiko; Kimura Tetsuya; Ogawa Hiroto; et al.
 * Source: PLOS ONE Volume: 6   Issue: 4     Article Number: e18244   DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0018244   Published: APR 1 2011


 * Title: Statolith growth of juvenile oval squid Sepioteuthis lessoniana (Cephalopoda: Loliginidae) with special reference to ambient thermal condition
 * Author(s): Ikeda Yuzuru; Kobayashi Masato
 * Source: MARINE BIOLOGY RESEARCH Volume: 6   Issue: 5   Pages: 485-495   Article Number: PII 923713191   DOI: 10.1080/17451000903334710   Published: 2010


 * Title: Mirror image reactions in the oval squid Sepioteuthis lessoniana
 * Author(s): Ikeda Yuzuru; Matsumoto
 * Source: FISHERIES SCIENCE Volume: 73   Issue: 6   Pages: 1401-1403   DOI: 10.1111/j.1444-2906.2007.01485.x   Published: DEC 2007


 * Title: Ontogeny of mantle musculature and implications for jet locomotion in oval squid Sepioteuthis lessoniana
 * Author(s): Thompson JT; Kier WM
 * Source: JOURNAL OF EXPERIMENTAL BIOLOGY Volume: 209   Issue: 3   Pages: 433-443   DOI: 10.1242/jeb.02017   Published: FEB 2006


 * I'll officially put the article on hold for seven days so you can address the image issues, and then I think we can wrap up this review. Sasata (talk) 20:12, 31 October 2011 (UTC)


 * Thanks for that, I've been unable to get away from real life responsibilities despite trying to, add our version of All Soul's Day to that and it's a bit hectic. --  Obsidi ♠ n   Soul   14:55, 2 November 2011 (UTC)


 * I can't find the source of the gladius picture. The dorsal and ventral picture is confirmed from page 317, plate 28 of the 1950-1953 issue of the Bulletin of the British Museum (Natural History). I am not familiar with the copyright laws of the United Kingdom (particularly Crown Copyright) and there is still a possibility that it may be public domain, but as of now I think it's best to treat it as possibly copyrighted (shame, really). Having no possible replacements in existence, I must remove them for now.


 * I'll have to pass on the additional literature as I don't have the time to seek them out right now. Nevertheless I'll see if I can do that in the future. They seem to be for pay publications so I'll post a request in the resource exchange maybe and see what can be made available for future expansions. Cheers.--  Obsidi ♠ n   Soul   20:35, 6 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Alright, I think the article now meets the GA criteria, and will promote it. Cheers, Sasata (talk) 06:35, 7 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Great! :) Thanks for the review and to Stemonitis as well.--  Obsidi ♠ n   Soul   11:15, 7 November 2011 (UTC)