Talk:Bird migration/GA1

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

Reviewer: Cwmhiraeth (talk · contribs) 10:38, 9 September 2014 (UTC)


 * I propose to take on this review. On preliminary inspection, it looks a thoroughly competent article. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 10:38, 9 September 2014 (UTC)

First reading

 * A few points:


 * Both the first two sentences in the lead are complex sentences which I consider have too many clauses before getting to the main verb.
 * reworded.


 * "... risks of the migration such as predation. Predation can be ..." - Better not to repeat the word "predation" in this way.
 * done.


 * Now that bird common names are no longer capitalised in Wikipedia, perhaps you should do likewise. I will note the examples I notice here: swallow, (eastwards!), red knot, dunlin, blue grouse, American goldfinch, Arctic tern, Arctic tern again, Manx shearwater, Bar-tailed Godwit, Griffon Vulture, Ruby-throated Hummingbird, Cedar Waxwing, Bar-tailed Godwit again, Osprey, Honey Buzzard, Canada Geese, Whooping Crane,
 * I think these have all been done now.


 * Bar-headed geese needs a capital!
 * done.


 * In the section "Long-distance migration" several birds have no scientific names whereas previously you have assiduously provided these.
 * done.


 * "... feeding sites is a barrier to may also be a barrier" - Muddled sentence.
 * fixed.


 * "...forage less on migration" - perhaps "during" for clarity.
 * done.


 * "...move further to the coast or to a more southerly region." - Perhaps "towards".
 * done.


 * Where did the red crossbill irruptions occur?
 * England stated.


 * "This is termed as protandry." Is the "as" necessary? Do you think this paragraph could be better expressed in layman's terms?
 * reworded.


 * "With experience they learn various landmarks ..." - The rest of this paragraph is talking about a bird in the singular.
 * changed to singular.


 * What has the sentence about "watchpoints" got to do with vagrancy?
 * reworded.


 * "- usually once a year but sometimes two -" - Maybe "twice"?
 * done.


 * "Considerable interest has been taken ..." - Into what?
 * reworded.


 * Why is "Emlen funnel" bolded?
 * removed. Chiswick Chap (talk) 13:44, 16 September 2014 (UTC)
 * I have now finished the first reading. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 09:02, 10 September 2014 (UTC)
 * @Cwmhiraeth: All comments actioned. Chiswick Chap (talk) 14:15, 16 September 2014 (UTC)

GA criteria

 * The article is well written and complies with MOS guidelines on prose and grammar, structure and layout. The suggestions I made above have been implemented
 * The article uses many reliable third-party sources, and makes frequent citations to them. I do not believe it contains original research.
 * The article covers the main aspects of the subject and remains focussed.
 * The article is neutral.
 * The article is stable.
 * The images are relevant and have suitable captions, and are either in the public domain or properly licensed.


 * Final assessment - I believe this article reaches the GA criteria and I would like to congratulate the nominator on an excellent article. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 10:54, 18 September 2014 (UTC)
 * Thank you very much. Chiswick Chap (talk) 13:07, 18 September 2014 (UTC)