Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Banksia petiolaris/archive1


 * The following is an archived discussion of a featured article nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured article candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.

The article was promoted by Sarastro1 via FACBot (talk) 21:08, 10 April 2018.

Banksia petiolaris

 * Nominator(s): Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 20:10, 12 March 2018 (UTC)

Yeah yeah I know, another banksia (like the other 31 FAs). Still, as a body of work I wanted to get them all featured. Anyway, short and sweet. It's comprehensive (I scoured the sources) and should read ok. Have at it. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 20:10, 12 March 2018 (UTC)

Support from Tim riley. It does indeed read ok. I'm no botanist, but I enjoyed and (I'm fairly sure) understood the article. Seems to this layman to be comprehensive, and is well and widely sourced. (I foresee a quibble about ISBN formatting from the source reviewer, but for my own part I don't much care whether ISBNs are hyphenated or in 10- or 13-digit form.) Very happy to support.  Tim riley  talk    19:09, 14 March 2018 (UTC)
 * thx! Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 03:18, 15 March 2018 (UTC)

Images are appropriately licensed. Nikkimaria (talk) 15:44, 17 March 2018 (UTC)

Sources review

 * Page range formats should be consistent throughout. Compare refs 2, 3 et al with refs 6, 9 et al
 * err, they are. They are more than two digits when they have 'clocked' the hundred mark... Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 23:44, 17 March 2018 (UTC)
 * You're right, I didn't look closely enough. Brianboulton (talk) 22:15, 20 March 2018 (UTC)


 * Ref 11 link is returning me a 404 error message
 * hmm, the doi is linking to the abstract ok for me.. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 23:48, 17 March 2018 (UTC)
 * Sorry, I meant 10 not 11, and I'm still getting 404 on that. Brianboulton (talk) 22:15, 20 March 2018 (UTC)


 * Ref 14: There's a hyphen in the page range that ought to be a ndash.
 * weird. the automated tool wouldn't fix that one. fixed now manually anyway Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 23:44, 17 March 2018 (UTC)

These are the only issues. Otherwise sources meet all FAC criteria. Brianboulton (talk) 17:57, 17 March 2018 (UTC)

Comments Edwininlondon
A fine article, short and sweet. I am neither a biologist nor a native speaker, so just a few comments:
 * Those of this species ... the longest-lived leaves of --> just a suggestion: The leaves of this species .. the longest-lived of
 * done Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 12:05, 26 March 2018 (UTC)


 * 15 degrees off vertical.[1] --> first 8 sentences all are sourced from [1], so it feels random to have this [1] here.
 * tweaked Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 12:05, 26 March 2018 (UTC)


 * linking is inconsistent: von Mueller is linked in lead and body, as I expected, but prostrate shrub only in lead. Flowering plant is linked on second occurrence in lead. Those are just examples.
 * checked a few links and changed Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 12:05, 26 March 2018 (UTC)


 * characters --> just checking, I'm a lay-person, is that really characters or perhaps characteristics?
 * latter more accessible to lay-readers so changed Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 12:05, 26 March 2018 (UTC)


 * as well as rockeries --> seems a bit lost.
 * massaged this section a bit Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 12:05, 26 March 2018 (UTC)


 * Banksia petiolaris in bud, cult. Sydney --> does this mean in bud, cultivated in Sydney?
 * yes/done Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 12:05, 26 March 2018 (UTC)

Edwininlondon (talk) 08:10, 26 March 2018 (UTC)

Support Edwininlondon (talk) 18:12, 26 March 2018 (UTC)
 * thx! Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 23:17, 26 March 2018 (UTC)

Comments from FunkMonk

 * I'll review this soon. FunkMonk (talk) 10:54, 26 March 2018 (UTC)
 * You describe what is shown in each photo in the article body, but could this be done for the taxobox photo as well? On Commons, it says " inflorescence, cult", which would be helpful.
 * done Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 12:15, 26 March 2018 (UTC)


 * No common names?
 * nope. doesn't appear to have any Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 12:15, 26 March 2018 (UTC)


 * "B. subg. Banksia", " B. sect. Banksia", "Banksia ser. Prostratae". Perhaps subgenus, section, etc, should be spelled out, I image most readers may not know what these abbreviations mean.
 * unabbreviated Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 12:15, 26 March 2018 (UTC)


 * "The genus Banksia L.f. (Proteaceae)" Since the title is in italics, I think the genus name should not be? See for example the reference in the article about that work.
 * tried to format but didn't work. As teh name of he monograph is the just the genus (and hence pretty unimaginative), I have tweaked it to link instead Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 12:15, 26 March 2018 (UTC)


 * "in the vicinity of Esperance" Only stated in intro.
 * aligned with body of text Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 11:34, 27 March 2018 (UTC)


 * Support - that's all I could find. FunkMonk (talk) 11:37, 27 March 2018 (UTC)

Source review from JM
Co-ordinators: I reviewed this article at GAC.
 * ""Banksia petiolaris F.Muell". Australian Plant Name Index (APNI), IBIS database. Centre for Plant Biodiversity Research, Australian Government." I find the italics a little odd, here, and is there a reason you haven't included an accessdate?
 * it is an old template. accessdate added manually. which talics? Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 11:30, 27 March 2018 (UTC)


 * "Mueller, Ferdinand J. H. von (1864). "Banksia petiolaris". Fragmenta Phytographiae Australiae. 4 (27): 109. Archived from the original on 2018-03-19." Should the binomial not be italicsed? It seems to be in the source.
 * italicised now. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 11:30, 27 March 2018 (UTC)


 * You're inconsistent on the capitalisation of article titles; notes 9, 10, 11, 12 and 16 are sentence case, 1, 7, 13, 15 and 17 are title case.
 * lowercased now. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 11:30, 27 March 2018 (UTC)


 * Is there a reason you don't link to Australian Journal of Botany in the references? Fragmenta Phytographiae Australiae (you cite this as a journal- is that appropriate?) BMC Evolutionary Biology? Global Change Biology?
 * linked now. I cited the other as a journal as the format of volumes and issues seemed to be appropriate Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 11:30, 27 March 2018 (UTC)


 * " Elliot, Rodger W.; Jones, David L.; Blake, Trevor (1985). Encyclopaedia of Australian Plants Suitable for Cultivation: Vol. 2. Port Melbourne: Lothian Press. p. 299. ISBN 0-85091-143-5." Would it not be more usual to cite the particular entry in the encyclopedia, rather than the encyclopedia as a whole?
 * hadn't given it much thought. entry added. lowercased now. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 11:30, 27 March 2018 (UTC)


 * " Sweedman, Luke; Merritt, David (2006). Australian seeds: a guide to their collection, identification and biology. CSIRO Publishing. p. 203. ISBN 0-643-09298-6." Surprising capitalisation; no location.
 * uppercased now. location added Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 11:30, 27 March 2018 (UTC)


 * "Mast, Austin R.; Givnish, Thomas J. (2002). "Historical biogeography and the origin of stomatal distributions in Banksia and Dryandra (Proteaceae) based on Their cpDNA phylogeny". American Journal of Botany. 89 (8): 1311–23. doi:10.3732/ajb.89.8.1311. ISSN 0002-9122. . Archived from the original on 2006-06-12. Retrieved 2006-07-02." Retrieval dates aren't necessary for journal publications.
 * removed now. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 11:30, 27 March 2018 (UTC)

That's about as picky as I can manage. All sources are appropriately scholarly. I have no opinion right now on comprehensiveness. Josh Milburn (talk) 18:56, 26 March 2018 (UTC)

Sarastro (talk) 21:08, 10 April 2018 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.