Talk:Paddlefish/GA1

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

Reviewer: Dunkleosteus77 (talk · contribs) 01:05, 17 August 2015 (UTC)

Criteria

 * Well-written:
 * the prose is clear and concise, it respects copyright laws, and the spelling and grammar are correct --- What do you mean in the "Classification" section by saying " and four (if not five) extinct genera"; the sentence "The American paddlefish is one of the largest freshwater fish in North America." seems out of place in the "Habitat and historic range" section; rename the "Culture" section, something on the lines of "Aquaculture" or "Farming" or "In captivity"
 * it complies with the manual of style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation.
 * Verifiable with no original research:
 * it contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline --- ✅ probably one of the easier requirements to pass
 * all in-line citations are from reliable sources, including those for direct quotations, statistics, published opinion, counter-intuitive or controversial statements that are challenged or likely to be challenged, and contentious material relating to living persons—science-based articles should follow the scientific citation guidelines --- You've done a good job tracking down nice sources (for the most part at least). I can't guarantee the "reliability" of the sources, as I've had trouble identifying them myself, but I've looked up Paddlefish and it is quite hard to get a good amount of info on any one source (on google anyway...) You'll have to get another persons opinion for this requirement.
 * it contains no original research. --- ✅ I don't believe you've written any pages on Paddlefish then cited them
 * Broad in its coverage:
 * it addresses the main aspects of the topic --- ✅ and does so quite nicely
 * it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style). --- Perhaps you could move the bit about migration patterns from the "Habitat and historic range" section to "Life cycle"
 * Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without bias, giving due weight to each. --- ✅ seems to me you weren't badmouthing Paddlefish or the people who extirpated them
 * Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute. --- ✅ as far as I know, there have been no edit wars
 * Illustrated, if possible, by images:
 * images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid fair use rationales are provided for non-free content --- ✅ only two images, but I can't blame you for that
 * images are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions. --- ✅ images for taxoboxes are very relevant

All in all it's a very well written article, providing a lot of information relative to the amount of references available. I do see this article as GA class. Dunkleosteus77  (push to talk)  01:05, 17 August 2015 (UTC)


 * , thank you for your time in reviewing this article and for your suggestions for improvement. I removed (if not five) from the Classification section; removed the sentence about American paddlefish being the largest freshwater fish in North America, and renamed the culture section to Propagation and culture for consistency with the FA, American paddlefish.  I think that pretty much covers it. Atsme 📞📧 05:43, 20 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Well, you've done a very good job before you started this review, and that's all I really have to say. It can pass. Dunkleosteus77   (push to talk)  21:39, 21 August 2015 (UTC)