Talk:Oryzomys albiventer/GA1

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

Reviewer:  Jimfbleak -  talk to me?  06:47, 24 March 2010 (UTC)


 * O. albiventer is further part of the O. couesi section, - "section" in this context needs a link or gloss- does it mean subgenus?
 * It's the term the source uses; I can't make more of it. It's not a subgenus because it doesn't have a one-word name. It might be inspired by section (botany).
 * Is it worth doing a complete legend for the map, naming all the species shown?
 * Possible. Not doing it makes the legend more concise, and it's not really that relevant to this article how some of the other species are called. I don't care much either way.

Nothing else really, there's not the masses of technical terms I usually nitpick about, so this shouldn't take long  Jimfbleak -  talk to me?  10:48, 24 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the review. This one has unfortunately never had a full and proper description, so I can't include many good technical terms on skull features. Ucucha 12:55, 24 March 2010 (UTC)

GA review (see here for criteria)


 * 1) It is reasonably well written.
 * a (prose): b (MoS):
 * 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: