Talk:Common vampire bat/GA2

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

Reviewer: Jim Sweeney (talk · contribs) 20:59, 11 December 2011 (UTC)


 * GA review (see here for criteria)


 * 1) It is reasonably well written.
 * a (prose): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):
 * 1) It is factually accurate and verifiable.
 * a (references): b (citations to reliable sources):  c (OR):
 * 1) It is broad in its coverage.
 * a (major aspects): b (focused):
 * 1) It follows the neutral point of view policy.
 * Fair representation without bias:
 * 1) It is stable.
 * No edit wars etc.:
 * 1) It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate.
 * a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass/Fail:
 * 1) It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate.
 * a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass/Fail:
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass/Fail:


 * I fixed everything. LittleJerry (talk) 02:20, 18 December 2011 (UTC)

Comments

 * No disamb links
 * The license for image File:Greenhall Crawford 1956.jpg would appear to need an OTRS ticket.
 * References all books needs ISBNs added and city of publication (some have them some don't)
 * Hill, J. E., and James D. Smith (1984). Bats: A Natural History needs page numbers added
 * Turner, Dennis C (1975) The Vampire Bat: a Field Study in Behavior and Ecology needs page numbers added
 * Consistency in style some references are written pgs 187-88. (No3) others pp. 85-97 (No28) and single pages pp. 262 (No25) should only have one "p" all need checking
 * All Internet links need an access date for the wayback machine to work.
 * Citation 26 is a dead link
 * In the further reading some books have ISBNs some have location of publication etc some years are in brackets some not all need to be the same

On hold
Well done some minor points. I've put the article on hold for seven days to allow folks to address the issues I've brought up. Feel free to contact me on my talk page, or here with any concerns, and let me know one of those places when the issues have been addressed. If I may suggest that you strike out, check mark, or otherwise mark the items I've detailed, that will make it possible for me to see what's been addressed, and you can keep track of what's been done and what still needs to be worked on. Jim Sweeney (talk) 07:58, 15 December 2011 (UTC)

Is the Altringham J. D. book in the references actually this one? MathewTownsend (talk) 16:09, 16 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Outside comments