Talk:Geoffroy's tamarin/GA1

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

Reviewer: Casliber (talk · contribs) 10:32, 30 November 2010 (UTC)

I'll make straightforward copyedits as I go and jot queries below. Casliber (talk · contribs) 10:32, 30 November 2010 (UTC)


 * In common with other callitrichides (tamarins and marmosets), Geoffroy's Tamarin is a small monkey, and the smallest Central American monkey - this makes it sound like the first clause refers to both subsequent clauseto s. Needs rewording


 *  In Panama, it can be found in Metropolitan Natural Park, an urban park within Panama City - seems odd stuck at the end. Can you incorporate it or place it next to other Panama bit?


 * Find best places to link diurnal and arboreal.


 * Population densities on Barro Colorado Island in Panama can range between 3.6 and 5.7 monkeys per square kilometer - not "can", surely they "do" range...?


 * Alot of paragraphs begin with the words "Geoffroy's Tamarin..." - any which can be reworded to avoid this would be good.


 * avoid competing for similar food sources too intensively.. --> "minimise competing" ?


 * Any other information on pet trade - only in panama? numbers? value per tamarin etc.?

Otherwise looking okay. Images are in order. Casliber (talk · contribs) 10:49, 30 November 2010 (UTC)

OK - fair point. Casliber (talk · contribs) 07:11, 3 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Thank you for your comments. I believe I have addressed them, except the last one.  I have not been able to find any specific information on the volume and prices of the species as a pet, or on possible pet trade specific to Colombia.  The only additional information I found was that apparently between 1986 and 2003, the Primate Refuge and Sanctuary of Panama collected more than 69 Geoffroy's Tamarins that were confiscated as illegal pets (or possibly that was the number that they had as of about 2003), which was more than any other Panamanian monkey.  But that hardly provides a magnitude for the volume of illegal pets, so I don't think it is particularly useful to add to the article. Rlendog (talk) 02:54, 3 December 2010 (UTC)

1. Well written?:
 * Prose quality:
 * Manual of Style compliance:

2. Factually accurate and verifiable?:
 * References to sources:
 * Citations to reliable sources, where required:
 * No original research:

3. Broad in coverage?:
 * Major aspects:
 * Focused:

4. Reflects a neutral point of view?:
 * Fair representation without bias:

5. Reasonably stable?
 * No edit wars, etc. (Vandalism does not count against GA):

6. Illustrated by images, when possible and appropriate?:
 * Images are copyright tagged, and non-free images have fair use rationales:
 * Images are provided where possible and appropriate, with suitable captions:

Overall:
 * Pass or Fail: