Talk:Schizocosa ocreata/GA1

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

Reviewer: Extraordinary Writ (talk · contribs) 23:53, 27 March 2021 (UTC)

I'll be glad to take a look at this article. Since this nomination appears to be the result of a Wiki Ed class, I'll just make a few preliminary comments for now. If you're still willing to work on the article, just respond to the comments and I'll keep on reviewing. Extraordinary Writ (talk) 23:53, 27 March 2021 (UTC)

Review
Once these issues are addressed, I'll have more to say. Cheers! Extraordinary Writ (talk) 23:53, 27 March 2021 (UTC) Here's another ping,, just in case the first notifications didn't go through. Let me know if you're still interested in working on this; otherwise I'll close the review in a few days. Extraordinary Writ (talk) 23:53, 30 March 2021 (UTC) Regrettably, I'll have to fail this nomination because there's been no engagement. (The nominator edited as part of a Wiki Ed class and has not been active in months.) The article really isn't all that far from GA status, so I hope that other contributors continue to improve it. Cheers, Extraordinary Writ (talk) 05:55, 6 April 2021 (UTC)
 * There are several short paragraphs of two or three sentences. If possible, I would recommend either expanding them or merging them with nearby paragraphs.
 * There are a few body paragraphs (e.g. in the "Molting" section) that lack citations but would seem to require them.
 * You use the phrase "it was found" five times. According to MOS:WEASEL, it's preferable to be a bit more specific, like "According to biologist Mary Smith..." or "A 2016 study by arachnologists John Smith and Jane Johnson found..."
 * 1a: The article could be written somewhat more formally (e.g. cut "you" and the contractions), but that's probably not a dealbreaker. A WP:GOCE/REQ copy-edit would likely be useful in ironing out the occasional typo.
 * 1b: The phrase "was found" is used five times. This is a weasel wording; the article ought to say when/by whom each fact was found. The information on melanization is found only in the lead; it should also appear in the body per MOS:LEAD. (It also needs a citation.)
 * 2a: Pass
 * 2b: Four paragraphs lack citations entirely.
 * 2c: Pass
 * 2d: Pass
 * 3a: Numerous paragraphs and sections are very short, suggesting to me that some necessary content is lacking. While I needn't decide one way or the other, future contributors are encouraged either to consolidate these paragraphs or to expand them
 * 3b: Pass
 * 4: No apparent issues
 * 5: Pass
 * 6a: No apparent issues
 * 6b: Pass

Hi, I will make these changes this week. Wikispiders11 (talk) 10:30, 6 April 2021 (UTC)