Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Goldfish/archive3

Goldfish
Samsara and I have helped to reorganize, wikify, reference, and greatly improve this article. This is the third time this article has been nominated. QuizQuick 20:49, 27 July 2006 (UTC) I hope these suggestions help. Peirigill 00:37, 29 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Object - Scarcity of inline citations and references. Wisdom89 21:54, 27 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Object - in addition to the above concern, the article is once again in need of a thorough copyedit. Why not wait for the Good Article decision first? - User:Samsara (talk • contribs) 22:30, 27 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Object - entire sections without references. Morgan695 04:43, 28 July 2006 (UTC)
 * *Support. Hezzy 18:33, 28 July 2006 (UTC) On second thought, Object.Hezzy 18:35, 28 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Hezzy, just so you know, FAC isn't a vote, so objecting without a reason given is meaningless. Fieari 18:56, 28 July 2006 (UTC)
 * That said, Object, for the reasons above. Fieari 18:56, 28 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Comments:
 * The first line feels weak. I expect the first line to define the subject, and to start strong.  While the early domestication and popularity of goldfish makes your topic notable, it doesn't tell me what a goldfish is, and the notability is markedly weakened by the phrase "one of the...".  I'd suggest starting with something like "The goldfish is a popular aquarium fish belonging to the carp family."
 * Per WP:LEAD, the lede should summarize the article, and should not include details not found later in the article. My rule of thumb is that if a topic is important enough to merit a section header, it should at least be mentioned in the lede.  I see nothing about feeding, behavior, breeding, etc., in your lede.
 * Similarly, the lede should include only the most important information. The fact that the carp family includes koi and crucians, or that proto-goldfish were "gray/olive/brown," isn't central enough to your topic to merit inclusion in the lede.  Both of these facts would be better mentioned in the History section.  The mutation of cyprinids belongs in History or Breeding, perhaps, but not in the lede.
 * Word choices often weaken the meaning, almost becoming "weasel words." The goldfish is "one of the earliest" fish to be domesticated.  It is "one of the most commonly kept" fish.  Goldfish are "relatively small" as carp go.  Goldfish "may grow" to 23 inches.  "Most" goldfish "generally" live for six to eight years.  "It is quite possible that owners will notice."  "Goldfish should learn."  See if you can strengthen the impact, perhaps with concrete data, like "Goldfish are highly popular aquarium fish, accounting for 55% of aquarium fish sales worldwide."  You could also simply say that the goldfish is "a small member of the carp family" and that "goldfish grow to a maximum length of 23 inches" without changing the meaning.  You could say "however, household goldfish have an average lifespan of six to eight years" or "household goldfish average only six to eight years."
 * Some words get unnecessarily repeated. The phrase "one of the" appears twice in the first sentence.  "Domesticated" is mentioned twice in the first paragraph.  The word "egg" appears twice in the passage "Goldfish, like all cyprinids, are egg-layers. They produce adhesive eggs that attach to aquatic vegetation."
 * You rely on several devices that impede flow. "Gray/olive/brown," for example, practically stops me in my tracks.  Even after stopping to parse this phrase, I'm not clear whether you mean that each fish was all three colors, that each fish could be any one of these colors, or that the fishes were an indeterminate color that mixed gray, olive, and brown together.  Your use of parentheses also impedes flow: "(which also includes the koi...)" and "(first domesticated in China)" both slow down reading and imply that the information is of secondary importance.  If this information really is of secondary importance, it doesn't belong in the lede.
 * "Goldfish, like all cyprinids, are egg-layers." How about "Golfish, like all cyprinids, lay eggs"?  Use strong verbs when available and appropriate.
 * The organization needs improvement. For example, you mention in the first paragraph that goldfish are "relatively small," but you discuss their size in detail in the second paragraph.  Find a way to bring the topic and the supporting details together.  The section on Mosquito control is too short to justify its own section; either expand it or merge it into another section.
 * I'm not crazy about the lists. Since you tell us more about the different varieties later in the article, why not remove the list altogether and replace it with a table of links at the bottom of the article? The section on Chinese varieties should be easy to convert to paragraph form.
 * Several sections, including Feeding, Native environment, and Breeding, have no references. The Behavior section has only one.
 * Why is "cyprinid" blue-linked in the Breeding section but not in the lede? Please fix the red link on "generalist."
 * Per WP:MOS, section headers shouldn't include the title of the article. You should rename the five section headers that include the word "goldfish."  "Edibility and cruelty" implies that goldfish are edible and cruel, which is not what you mean.
 * Per WP:CAPTION, try to take advantage of some reviewers' preference for captions that are complete sentences. Instead of "Goldfish swimming in a goldfish bowl," use the caption to reinforce some fact about the goldfish's size, or popularity as aquarium fish, or coloration, so that the image illustrates the article rather than just decorating it.