Talk:Wolf/GA1

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

Reviewer: LittleJerry (talk · contribs) 16:23, 25 March 2012 (UTC)

Article looks good overall, however there are a few things that need to be fixed.


 * The lede doesn't seem complete enough. It should also summarise their anatomy, appearence and communication. Also, the first and second paragraphs should be merged as they both talk at the wolf's historical range and persecution.


 * The first, third and fourth paragraphs of the "Evolution section" as well as the last paragraph of the "Enemies and competitors" subsection, could use more cites. There are large chunks of information without cites inbetween.


 * The citation for Japanese wolves does not have page cites.


 * This is in marked contrast to the feeding behaviours of dholes and African wild dogs, who give priority to their pups when feeding. This line cites an book on dholes. Does it even mention African dogs?


 * I don't suppose "hackles" needs to be linked.--GoShow (...............) 00:44, 1 April 2012 (UTC)

I guess I had to fix it myself. The book on Japanese wolf is a minor issue for GA anyway.

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: LittleJerry (talk) 17:42, 1 April 2012 (UTC)