Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Markham's storm petrel/archive1

Markham's storm petrel

 * Nominator(s): Therapyisgood (talk) 03:05, 29 January 2023 (UTC)

This article is about Markham's storm petrel, described as "one of the least known seabirds in the world". This passed GA in 2020 with a review by. A peer review by in 2021. Thus, I bring to you this article for FAC consideration. Thank you in advance for all those who review. I have asked for a co-nom at WikiProject Birds, that is still open if you're familiar with the topic. Therapyisgood (talk) 03:05, 29 January 2023 (UTC)

Image review
 * What is the source of the data presented in the map? What is the base map used?
 * Now switched to a new map which notes the base map and the data source. Therapyisgood (talk) 18:22, 1 February 2023 (UTC)
 * Also on the map, see MOS:COLOUR. Nikkimaria (talk) 04:36, 29 January 2023 (UTC)

Support Comments from Jim
An initial query or two about referencing style. Firstly, you use sentence case for Spanish article titles, and title case for English titles, including translation of the Spanish. How does this fit with MoS? Secondly, you need to italicise binomials in article titles as well as in the text Jimfbleak - talk to me? 09:46, 29 January 2023 (UTC)
 * Italicized binomials. Therapyisgood (talk) 05:59, 30 January 2023 (UTC)
 * I don't think we normally link countries or continents
 * Delnked. Therapyisgood (talk) 05:16, 30 January 2023 (UTC)
 * Hydrobates and Wilson's petrel are over-linked
 * Delinked, good catch. Therapyisgood (talk) 05:11, 30 January 2023 (UTC)
 * large compared to other members in the genus, which also comprises small seabirds.&mdash; isn't the last clause redundant?
 * Cut, but I'm open to re-adding. I think Dunkleosteus77 emphasized that I explain terms, so that's where that might have came from. Therapyisgood (talk) 05:16, 30 January 2023 (UTC)
 * current practice as of 2008&mdash; How current is 2008?
 * Cut "current". Therapyisgood (talk) 05:09, 30 January 2023 (UTC)
 * ' 'Its iris is brown''&mdash; need to restate subject I think, link iris, link endemic
 * Linked and subject restated. Therapyisgood (talk) 05:21, 30 January 2023 (UTC)
 * Sexes are alike in terms of physical description. Its eggs are described as pure white without gloss.&mdash; Its eggs doesn't have an obvious subject, the previous subjects were Sexes, Tail, and Adult male... Also, I don't think you have said that juveniles are similar to adults even in the hand
 * Added subject. Will get to the juveniles when I find a source. Therapyisgood (talk) 05:48, 30 January 2023 (UTC)
 * Do you have a source for the "juveniles" statement? Therapyisgood (talk) 07:31, 30 January 2023 (UTC)
 * Yes, the BoW page linked below says There are no known morphological differences between adults and juveniles. In other species of storm-petrels, birds can be recognized in the hand using the shape of the tip of the feathers. Jimfbleak - talk to me? 08:23, 30 January 2023 (UTC)
 * Thank you, added. Therapyisgood (talk) 20:28, 30 January 2023 (UTC)
 * As previously mentioned, the map needs clarification. I appreciate that at-sea map are a bit vague, and the map in Onley and Scofield bears little resemblance to that in Cornell Birds of the World, but all the more reason to be clear on your data source
 * I added a new map but put in a request at Graphics Lab/Map workshop for a map (a simple crop). Now there's a source for the data and the base map is public domain. The non-breeding range is also blue. Therapyisgood (talk) 18:22, 1 February 2023 (UTC)
 * You don't mention moult other than in passing. There isn't much to say, but Onley p 233 says that moulting adults are seen in the southern spring and early summer, moulting juveniles several months earlier
 * Added, thank you for this information. Therapyisgood (talk) 22:09, 31 January 2023 (UTC)
 * egg colour (white) not mentioned? In Paracas, the incubation averages 47 days (range 37-70 days, n = 28; 16) Both the male and female share incubation duties. In Paracas, incubation shifts lasted three days or less (16). No details on the breeding colonies in Chile. Should be included, if you can't source it, its in BoW Medrano, F., J. Drucker, and A. Jaramillo (2021). Markham's Storm-Petrel (Hydrobates markhami), version 2.1. In Birds of the World (T. S. Schulenberg, S. M. Billerman, and B. K. Keeney, Editors). Cornell Lab of Ornithology, Ithaca, NY, USA. https://doi.org/10.2173/bow.maspet.02.1
 * Added. Therapyisgood (talk) 18:50, 1 February 2023 (UTC)
 * IUCN needs full name and link
 * Linked and expanded. Therapyisgood (talk) 05:40, 30 January 2023 (UTC)
 * an estimate by Barros et al., who estimated up to 20,875 &mdash; Are you convinced the estimate is accurate to units level? If not, needs rounding
 * No, rounded. Therapyisgood (talk) 21:47, 31 January 2023 (UTC)
 * birds believing they had already reached the coast&mdash; needs some qualification unless inter-species telepathy was involved
 * Changed. Therapyisgood (talk) 06:00, 30 January 2023 (UTC)
 * a large amount of juveniles&mdash;large number
 * Changed. Therapyisgood (talk) 05:21, 30 January 2023 (UTC)
 * ' 'En Peligro de Extinción'' should this be italicised? Jimfbleak - talk to me? 16:21, 29 January 2023 (UTC)
 * Yes, changed. Therapyisgood (talk) 06:06, 30 January 2023 (UTC)
 * more later Jimfbleak - talk to me?</i>

12:01, 29 January 2023 (UTC)


 * I think that the only other comments I'd make is that the appearance of the egg is under Description, rather than breeding, which seems odd, and that BoW gives the mean egg size as 32.2 x 24.2 mm (n = 155; 16). <b style="font-family:Lucida;color:red">Jimfbleak</b> - <i style="font-family:arial;color:green">talk to me?</i> 09:16, 30 January 2023 (UTC)


 * Therapyisgood, I think we are nearly there. As far as I can see, you haven't added the egg data above. With regard to the map, unless its creator can enlighten you (hasn't edited at commons for a year), you might well have to redraw using an identified blank map from commons. The range obviously won't be exact, but we need to know what source you use, and we tend to use blue for non-breeding, see project page <b style="font-family:Lucida;color:red">Jimfbleak</b> - <i style="font-family:arial;color:green">talk to me?</i> 11:56, 1 February 2023 (UTC)
 * Thank you, see replies above. Therapyisgood (talk) 18:50, 1 February 2023 (UTC)


 * I don't visit the bird project talk page much these days, so I didn't pick up you were writing this, otherwise I could have helped before FAC. I've changed to support above, good luck <b style="font-family:Lucida;color:red">Jimfbleak</b> - <i style="font-family:arial;color:green">talk to me?</i> 11:28, 2 February 2023 (UTC)

Queries Support by WereSpielChequers
Thanks for writing this, I learned something here
 * I'm intrigued by "After hatching, fledglings make their way to sea" as it implies the lack of a chick phase and a biology more reminiscent of turtles than birds. Having read Breeding_phenology_distribution_and_conservation_status_of_Markham_s_Storm_Petrel_Oceanodroma_markhami_in_the_Atacama_Desert Which specifically mentions finding chicks, birds returning to the nest, and the time periods for the breeding season, I think the bird does have a chick phase between hatching and leaving the nest as a fledgling.
 * I've clarified "after a chick phase" Therapyisgood (talk) 03:57, 7 February 2023 (UTC)
 * Clones. Re "Adult males have a wingspan of 172.7 millimetres (6.80 in) compared to a wingspan of 169.8 millimetres (6.69 in) in adult females" these are very specific measurements. By comparison, in Wilson's_storm_petrel there is a wingspan range with the largest individuals 10% larger than the smallest. Could this be the measurement of the type specimen or an average rather than a standard?  Ϣere Spiel  Chequers  22:43, 5 February 2023 (UTC)
 * These are both very good points. For the second one, the measurements are of a sample of 6 males and 5 females. See here on Internet Archive. I can't find a better source for wingspans and tarsus size, but have clarified based on the source. Therapyisgood (talk) 03:32, 7 February 2023 (UTC)
 * Thanks, do we know anything of lifespan yet? I'm assuming there have been some ringing programs.  Ϣere Spiel  Chequers  11:17, 7 February 2023 (UTC)
 * Another good point. I can't find anything on lifespan. Therapyisgood (talk) 23:57, 11 February 2023 (UTC)
 * Thanks for looking, if the sources don't yet exist for this, well we can't go beyond the sources.  Ϣere Spiel  Chequers  08:36, 17 February 2023 (UTC)

Jens
I think that the Taxonomy section needs work. I felt that it is too vague; the succession of information suboptimal; and hard to follow. Some details below to illustrate this:


 * Hydrobatidae probably diverged from other petrels at an early stage. – This is vague; what does "at an early stage" mean? For this, we need some idea how old the petrel group is.
 * Looking at this now. Therapyisgood (talk) 02:29, 14 February 2023 (UTC)
 * Took me a while but I finally found a source which places petrels with "sustantial radiation" by the Miocene. Therapyisgood (talk) 03:05, 14 February 2023 (UTC)
 * Storm petrel fossils are rare, found dating from the Upper Miocene in California. – I don't understand the sentence. What does "found dating" mean?
 * Clarified. Therapyisgood (talk) 02:10, 14 February 2023 (UTC)
 * Wilson's storm petrel, Oceanites oceanicus, in the physically similar but only distantly related Oceanitidae, may have been the first storm petrel to inhabit the Northern Hemisphere, thus possibly starting the subfamily Hydrobatinae of which Markham's storm petrel is a member – That is impossible, as Hydrobatinae can't be within Oceanitidae when both are considered monophyletic taxa.
 * I'm no expert, so I've cut the sentence though the source says something to that affect. Therapyisgood (talk) 05:44, 28 February 2023 (UTC)
 * Hydrobates, the only genus in the family, – would help to point this out much earlier when introducing Hydrobatinae.
 * Moved. Therapyisgood (talk) 00:41, 12 February 2023 (UTC)
 * It was formerly defined in the genus Oceanodroma before that genus was synonymized with Hydrobates. – Which is repeated in the next paragraph? Better keep information together, and not fragment it like this.
 * Cut. Therapyisgood (talk) 01:06, 12 February 2023 (UTC)
 * Anything about the genus "Cymochorea"? Is this still valid, and if not, which what genus has it been synonymised?
 * It is not still valid. I beleive it's been synonymized with Oceanodroma but I am having a hard time finding a source. Therapyisgood (talk) 17:26, 14 February 2023 (UTC)
 * a British explorer and naval officer who picked up a specimen off Peru. – only "a specimen", or is it the type specimen on which the first description was based? That should be mentioned.
 * It was the Type specimen per Birds of the World. Therapyisgood (talk) 00:07, 12 February 2023 (UTC)
 * though practice as of 2008 recognized them as different species – what does "though practise as of 2008" mean? "Subsequent research"?
 * Reworded. Therapyisgood (talk) 01:53, 12 February 2023 (UTC)
 * reclassified Oceanodroma markhami as Hydrobates markhami based on reclassification in – "reclassified" based on "reclassification" is poor wording.
 * Reworded. Therapyisgood (talk) 00:33, 12 February 2023 (UTC)
 * volume 1, by founder of HBW Josep del Hoyo and British ornithologist Nigel J. Collar – This might be excessive detail when compared to the rest of the taxonomy section which for my personal taste is a bit sparese in detail.
 * Cut del Hoyo's titles. Therapyisgood (talk) 00:32, 12 February 2023 (UTC)
 * Its name in Spanish literature is – can this be generalised to "Spanish language", or is that name only used in written texts?
 * Generalized. Added a name with a ref according to Spanish wiki. Therapyisgood (talk) 00:55, 12 February 2023 (UTC)
 * with its species predominately endemic to the northern hemisphere. – Here, it would be great to add the number of species to provide context. Only needs a single number in front of "species", but would be a bit more informative.
 * Added with reference. Therapyisgood (talk) 05:57, 28 February 2023 (UTC)
 * and is comparatively large compared to other members in the genus. – I would add this comparison bit to the other comparison at the beginning of the paragraph. First discuss the taxonomy (family, genus, and how the Markham's is different; then discuss the evolution).
 * Moved, please let me know if this isn't OK. Therapyisgood (talk) 05:41, 28 February 2023 (UTC)
 * Will continue reading later. --Jens Lallensack (talk) 17:37, 6 February 2023 (UTC)
 * I will get to these shortly, thank you for the review. Therapyisgood (talk) 22:35, 10 February 2023 (UTC)


 * comments responded to. Therapyisgood (talk) 05:57, 28 February 2023 (UTC)
 * Sorry for the delay, I will get back to this as soon as possible. Jens Lallensack (talk) 08:02, 28 February 2023 (UTC)


 * In 2016, the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN) reclassified Oceanodroma markhami as Hydrobates markhami based on HBW and BirdLife International Illustrated Checklist of the Birds of the World, volume 1, by Josep del Hoyo and British ornithologist Nigel J. Collar. – Not sure here, but shouldn't this sentence organised the other way around: If del Hoyo first introduced the combination "Hydrobates markhami" (this is what you want to say?), then this should be stated first. If needed, you then could add that this has then been adopted by the IUCN (if this is important; maybe it can also be removed). This way, it is in chronological order and much less confusing.


 * This PeerJ paper (https://peerj.com/articles/12669/), in Fig. 1, has a wonderful photograph of this species in dorsal view in flight. That would be a great addition to the article; the image is under a free licence!


 * the whitening produces a broad grayish bar that generally extends closer to the wing's bend than what American ornithologist Robert Cushman Murphy observed as a somewhat similar mark in the black petrel Loomelania melania (Procellaria parkinsoni) – this is a bit too long to read and comprehend in one go, I suggest to make two sentences out of it.


 * Is above sentence talking about the upper side of the wings? That is not clear to me, too.


 * Murphy described the species as difficult to distinguish in life from the black petrel, with the chief difference being a much shorter tarsus. – This could be misleading, as it might suggest that this is the only feature for differentiation. However, the band on the upper side of the wings seems to be the key feature. I suggest to group these two together, and reformulate to make it clear how these species are separated.


 * Two female specimens taken from 00°18′N 81°51′W in August 1967, both with small gonads and unused oviducts, had heavy contour molt and light fat. – Optional: I am not sure what to make out of this information; a bit of context here would greatly help. What are the implications of this observation?


 * "no known morphological differences between adults and juveniles", even in hand – I think that WP:MOS somewhere requires page numbers for quotes.


 * Markham's storm petrel has a more leisurely flight pattern than that of the black petrel – should this simply be "then the black petrel"?


 * and state that Markham's storm petrel has a similar flight pattern to Leach's storm petrel. – this could be much shortened to avoid repetition of "Markham's storm petrel" again in the same sentence.


 * petrel typically flies greater than one meter – I am not an English expert, but wondering if this should better be "more" instead of "greater"


 * Canadian author RGB Brown – any reason you don't call him an ornithologist? He publishes a lot of technical literature, and alone for this reason should qualify as one?


 * the birds tended to glide over two observations, with shallow and rapid wingbeats,[18] though an observation by American ornithologist Rollo Beck described its wingbeats as slow – I can't follow this one. First, what does "over two observations" mean? Second, how does Beck's statement contradict this (as implied by "though")?


 * After further exploration in November 2013 based on the recording,[20][26] in 2019, – I can't quite follow; is it 2013 or 2019 when the discovery was made?


 * Both the female and male engage in duties related to incubation. – Does that simply mean they both incubate? If so, it could be formulated as such. Otherwise it is not clear what "duties related to incubation" are; all activities within the breeding season are to some degree related to incubation.


 * Mean width of the widest part of openings to nest burrows in Chile was measured at 10.3 centimetres (4.1 in) with a standard deviation of ± 3.1 centimetres (1.2 in), with the narrowest part measured at 6.8 centimetres (2.7 in) with a deviation of ± 1.9 centimetres (0.75 in). The average depth of the burrows was greater than 40 centimetres (16 in). – Optional: In my opinion, the standard deviations are excessive detail that makes it hard to read. It could be shortened to "On average, the nest burrows were 40 cm deep; the burrow openings were 10.3 cm wide at their widest part and 6.8 cm at their narrowest part."


 * The average depth of the burrows was greater than – this does not make sense: Is it an average depth, or a minumum depth (as suggested by "greater than")?


 * link "fledgling" (to Fledge)


 * After hatching, in Chile, the fledglings move towards the sea after a chick phase. – "quick" compared to what? As it is, the "quick" does not convey any information. Better be more specific with a measured time span if that is available. I am also not sure what that means – moving towards the sea: Do they stay on the shore or do they swim (while still being fed by their parents)?


 * The proportion of birds that feed or rest, compared to flying in transit, was significantly higher in austral autumn than spring in Spear and Ainley's 2007 study. – Here, I think the reader wants to know what this proportion is. How much food is consumed while flying, how much while resting? The information that this proportion is higher in autumn seems to be of secondary importance?


 * Rodrigo Barros et al. – to be accessible, "et al." should either be linked or, better, replaced with "and colleagues". --Jens Lallensack (talk) 14:06, 2 March 2023 (UTC)


 * Medrano combined a new colony description with previous findings by Barros in 2019 – 2019 referrs to Medrano or Barros?


 * 3,300 fledglings had been grounded due to their lights – How can a fledgling become grounded? If it can fly, it is no longer a fledgling, right?


 * the Chilean MMA produced a Recuperación, Conservación y Gestión de Especies [Recovery, Conservation and Management of Species] plan – difficult to read; I would use the English translation only, and if the Spanish original is needed it could be placed in a footnote.


 * as updating a light pollution standard to mitigate the effects of artificial lights on the birds – does "updating" mean that such a standard already exist?


 * Description of the voice is missing?


 * That's all from me! --Jens Lallensack (talk) 14:47, 2 March 2023 (UTC)

Funk

 * As this appears to be the nominator's first animal FAC, it's probably good with another review by a zoology editor. I'll have a more thorough look when Jens is done. FunkMonk (talk) 14:27, 22 February 2023 (UTC)
 * There appears to be a bunch of WP:duplinks, which can be highlighted with this script:
 * Hard to figure out who took the taxobox photo, pinging uploader . Could need a description template. FunkMonk (talk) 14:27, 22 February 2023 (UTC)
 * Any cladogram?
 * Other relevant images? Habitat, prey, predators?
 * The sole eternal link seems a bit random?


 * , nudge. Gog the Mild (talk) 13:47, 8 March 2023 (UTC)
 * I want to withdraw this for now. Therapyisgood (talk) 03:34, 11 March 2023 (UTC)
 * Withdrawn as requested. Note that the two-week hiatus will apply.

Gog the Mild (talk) 12:28, 11 March 2023 (UTC)