Talk:Petter's big-footed mouse/GA1

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

Reviewer: Casliber (talk · contribs) 05:29, 4 January 2011 (UTC)

Okay, you know the drill :)

' 'Its distribution may have shifted because of climatic changes and competition with introduced species.'' - I'd rejig this to "Climatic changes and competition with introduced species may have impacted upon/affected/reduced its distribution. "
 * Done. Ucucha 08:42, 4 January 2011 (UTC)

"vicariant" which is an unusual word, is not mentioned in the Allopatric speciation article at all (apart from as a target for the redirect). I'd think of linking to a wiktionary def if there is a good one, or adding material to the linked article and redirecting to the subheading maybe....or possibly using a plainer english term?
 * Reworded. Ucucha 08:42, 4 January 2011 (UTC)

" cover hairs" - I don't recall this expression before though I think I cna guess what it means...link or gloss maybe?
 * They are the main fur, in contrast to the guard hairs which are longer and extend over the cover fur. I've glossed. Ucucha 08:42, 4 January 2011 (UTC)

I am thinking WRT logical flow that sentences 2 and 3 should swap places in the Distribution and ecology section. See what you think.
 * Sentence 2 refers to the Andaladomo forest region in general, not to the fragment where they found M. petteri, so I think it's better as is. Ucucha 08:42, 4 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Aha, that helps. Agree then and good catch for reducing ambiguity. Casliber (talk · contribs) 13:44, 4 January 2011 (UTC)

1. Well written?:
 * Prose quality:
 * Manual of Style compliance: - just the minor issues outlined above. Fairly straighforward. Casliber (talk · contribs) 05:32, 4 January 2011 (UTC)

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: N/A
 * Images are provided where possible and appropriate, with suitable captions: N/A

Overall:
 * Pass or Fail: nearly there. Otherwise looking good as always. I know what the answers to my questions on diet and breeding will be ;) Casliber (talk · contribs) 05:29, 4 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Yes, unfortunately. Thanks for the review; I've replied above. Ucucha 08:42, 4 January 2011 (UTC)