Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Dryomyza anilis/archive2

Dryomyza anilis

 * Nominator(s): AnuBalasubramanian (talk) 20:52, 27 January 2020 (UTC)

This article is about the fly Dryomyza anilis, with a significant portion of the page focusing on mating behavior. I underwent a rigorous round of edits to improve the page to GA status, and believe that it is a realistic candidate for FA status. I am absolutely open to hearing any and all feedback to improve the page. I also believe I have successfully incorporated edits from my first FA nomination for this page (I incorrectly nominated the page for FA before going through the GA process). AnuBalasubramanian (talk) 20:52, 27 January 2020 (UTC)

Coord note -- Hi, just to be clear, there's no requirement to go through GAN before FAC, but getting as many eyes on an article as possible before FAC, whether through GAN, Peer Review, or just asking people, is certainly useful. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 21:46, 27 January 2020 (UTC)

Comments of Fowler&fowler
Hello AnuBalasubramanian: I can help you with the lead, which seems short for the article's size. I will get around to that in a day or two, but I couldn't help noticing the language, which seems a tad too technical. Would you consider wiki-linking some of the unfamiliar words so that someone like me, a rank beginner, can take a stab at summarizing the text into the descriptive prose appropriate for the lead? Fowler&amp;fowler «Talk»  16:49, 29 January 2020 (UTC)

Comments from JM
Just looking at the reference list...
 * BugGuide probably isn't reliable, as far as FAC goes. It's hosted by a university, but here's the disclaimer: "Dedicated naturalists volunteer their time and resources here to provide this service. We strive to provide accurate information, but we are mostly just amateurs attempting to make sense of a diverse natural world."
 * Same for NatureSpot. It looks like a great little local conservation charity, but it's not at the level of the sort of sources we'd be looking for here - unless you think I'm wrong about that?
 * "Otronen, null"?
 * Your Hocking reference is incomplete.
 * I couldn't see anything supporting the claim "As the fly matures, its cephalopharyngeal skeleton also modifies with time to maximize the fly's ability to take in nutrients." on the "Diptera – an overview" source, but I didn't look that closely. The reason I was looking is that the page is just providing extracts from Elsevier books/journals related to the Diptera. Perhaps it would be better to cite the books/articles/chapters/whatever in question directly?
 * Are your date formats consistent?
 * Are you consistent in your use of capitals? You seem to change between title case and sentence case for article titles. Also check your italics in article titles. And the way you refer to authors (Milburn, J. vs. Milburn, Josh - etc.). Things just look a little untidy right now - fine for GAC, but something that needs sorted for FAC.
 * Is this worth citing?

Sorry - I know these comments are frightfully dull, but this is the sort of thing that needs to be gotten right at FAC. I have to oppose until these things are sorted, but I'd be happy to withdraw my oppose and take a look at the rest of the article once the sourcing issues are resolved. Josh Milburn (talk) 21:34, 29 January 2020 (UTC) For the record, I'm taking part in the WikiCup. Josh Milburn (talk) 21:34, 29 January 2020 (UTC)

Image review

 * Consider adding alt text.
 * There is no need to add a caption to the infobox image, as that just results in "Dryomyza anilis" appearing both above and below the image.
 * "File:Dryomyza (=Neuroctena) anilis - male (22900404455).jpg": "dog poo" in the description is not very encyclopedic; and may not travel well for non-BritEng speakers.
 * I there a reason why "File:Dryomyza anilis 05.JPG" is set smaller than the other images. I note that it uses px to size; this is depreciated, could you use upright?
 * Caption "Face of Dryomyza anilis, depicting the fly's large red eyes". Being picky about your choice of words, the picture depicts the face, as you say; possibly '; note the large red eyes' or similar?
 * Caption "Wing markings of Dryomyza anilis. Similar.
 * The "source" does not link to the image; replace it with the link against "Description".

The above notwithstanding, impressive work on the images for a first FAC.

Gog the Mild (talk) 21:11, 3 February 2020 (UTC)

Dunkleosteus77

 * Just kinda jumping around, "D. anilis serve as saprophages in the ecosystem" a saprophage is immobile. Did you mean "detritivore" or more simply "scavenger"?  User:Dunkleosteus77 &#124;push to talk 00:20, 4 February 2020 (UTC)
 * Why do you use a painting of salmon instead of a picture of an actual salmon?  User:Dunkleosteus77 &#124;push to talk 00:20, 4 February 2020 (UTC)
 * "D. anilis has recently been placed back in the genus Dryomyza, of which it is the type species" if it's the type species how is it placed back? You didn't give enough context in the lead to say this  User:Dunkleosteus77 &#124;push to talk 00:20, 4 February 2020 (UTC)
 * Don't italicize family names, only genus and species names  User:Dunkleosteus77 &#124;push to talk 00:20, 4 February 2020 (UTC)

Coord note (2)
Hi, it's been well over a week since the first comments and no response from the nominator, plus I think the sourcing concerns Josh raises are probably best sorted outside the pressures of FAC, so I'm going to archive this. Aside from the suggestions above, I'd again recommend, per Brian and Laser brain at the previous FAC, considering a mentor for a future nomination. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 11:52, 8 February 2020 (UTC)

Ian Rose (talk) 11:52, 8 February 2020 (UTC)