Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/White-winged Fairy-wren


 * 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 User:SandyGeorgia 00:06, 4 June 2008.

White-winged Fairy-wren
I'm nominating this article for featured article because I believe it is on par with other bird Featured Articles with respect to comprehensiveness and prose. I am keeping my fingers crossed for another image or two but there is little I can do if permission is not given, thus I do not see it as a deal-breaker. All comments and suggestions much appreciated into how I can improve this article. Cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 10:36, 26 May 2008 (UTC)

Support I am a member of the birds project, but not seen or edited this article prior to today.
 * The White-winged Fairy-wren (Malurus leucopterus) is a species of passerine bird in the Maluridae family. It is endemic to the dryer parts of central Australia, stretching from central Queensland and South Australia across to Western Australia, and is part of the large order of passerines. Passerine repeated (oops. missed that)
 * The back region between the shoulders is in fact bare, with feathers arising from the shoulder (scapular) region and sweeping inwards in differing patterns; this had confused early naturalists into describing two species this seems a bit detached from former mention of back (changed to "this had confused early naturalists into describing both a white-backed and a blue-backed species" i.e. the parting of the feathers had confused experts into thinking there were two species of different plumage. clearer?)


 * Phylogenetic -link or gloss (linked. thanks Graham)
 * least concern should this be capped? (either that or italicised. done)
 * closer in distance = "closer" or "nearer" (well spotted. nearer it is)
 * Each clan has a specified area of land that all members contribute to foraging from and defending—although these orders may vary year to year. What orders? (I removed the clause as it is self-evident that roles (i.e. orders) will vary from time to time. Too vague as is and adds nothing)
 * Wing-fluttering – does it need the cap? (The book uses single quotes and capitalisation as they are terms coined for specific displays. I was following the convention)
 * ref 1 – retrieval date not linked
 * perhaps the lead could be split as three sentences? jimfbleak (talk) 12:40, 26 May 2008 (UTC)

Support. As usual, I have made some suggestions,, (not all mine). I have a few quibbles:

 Oppose Support—the writing needs work. But it's the type of writing that will scrub up very nicely indeed with one to two hours' work by a copy-editor. Otherwise there are attractive things about this piece. These examples of glitches come from the lead alone. The whole article needs treatment.
 * "A white-winged fairy [that] may be sexually promiscuous and each partner may mate with other individuals"? I'm shocked; but seriously, the last eight words puzzle me after "sexually promiscuous".
 * The old noun plus -ing problem: "it exhibits marked sexual dimorphism with one or more males of a social group adopting brightly coloured plumage during the breeding season". It's not grammatical; please see these exercises in fixing it. Here, I think ", in which ... adopt ...". There's another one in the lead, too: "Three subspecies are recognised, with one occurring ..."—Try a colon plus "one occurs ...". Can you audit for this construction throughout? (they seem to have been done now. everyone is chipping in...)Cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 06:09, 27 May 2008 (UTC)
 * "... the male. The male ..."
 * "light-blue" and "bright-blue" as double adjectives, certainly in AusEng. (erm, okay then)Cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 06:09, 27 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Unclear causality: "As a result,"—the "small, inconspicuous" bit I guess is equated with the "sandy-brown" colour of the females? The reader has to work hard there. But just why their accompaniment by one blue older male results from a previously stated fact I can't fathom. TONY   (talk)  16:32, 26 May 2008 (UTC)
 * (Reworded to "Younger, but sexually mature, males are almost indistinguishable from females and are the commonest breeding males. Thus a troop of White-winged Fairy-wrens seen in spring and summer comprises a brightly coloured older male accompanied by a number of small, inconspicuous brown birds, many of which are actually males" - initially folks thought all the brown birds were female, and hence these type of birds were called mormon wrens) - better?


 * That's a great looking range map. --JayHenry (talk) 01:55, 27 May 2008 (UTC) (har har) Cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 06:09, 27 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Comments a lot of interesting material but may need some reorganization. The Threats section seems out of place within Behaviour with only the distraction displays fitting in. Shyamal (talk) 03:27, 27 May 2008 (UTC)
 * (I had combined predators, threats and threat-avoiding displays in a threats section. Shall I just leave it in a big behaviour section, or relabel predators and threats?)
 * I guess the predators and threats should go into a new top level section - population and status or suchlike, the distraction displays can stay under behaviour or possibly just dealt in the breeding part since the rodent run is associated with nesting. Shyamal (talk) 06:03, 27 May 2008 (UTC)
 * OK, I have reorganized but left as a subheading, I figured if prey is a subheadding then predators could be too. I do like hierarchies of headings. No hugely fussed and I don't mind if you want to take the extra = off to make a full heading really. Cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 06:14, 27 May 2008 (UTC)


 * Both island subspecies are nearer in distance to mainland populations of leuconotus than to each other; - The structure of the subsequent work suggests that the idea is to say that the islands are (physically/geographically) closer to the mainland than to each other and that they were connected to the mainland during glacial times and therefore that the populations are genetically closer to the mainland populations than to each other. I am not sure if that is what is meant and if it is coming through clearly due to the use of distance in both geographic and evolutionary senses. Shyamal (talk) 03:33, 28 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Have made some copyedits to fix this. Hope there is no mutation in meaning. Shyamal (talk) 02:44, 29 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Yep. meaning remains unmutated. Cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 04:52, 29 May 2008 (UTC)


 * Support - I have done a Google scholar check and am satisfied that most of the journal references have been reviewed and incorporated into the article to make it comprehensive and well referenced. Prose is good while images, video and audio media can be hoped for in the future. Shyamal (talk) 02:44, 29 May 2008 (UTC)
 * I have a request in for images and am awating written replies. One can only hope...Cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 04:52, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

Comments
 * Current ref 5 "Rowley & Russell (Families of the World) is lacking a publisher and publication date, could these be provided, oh, wait, I see it's finally given in ref 30. Perhaps you could move that to a "references section" for the used-more-than-once refs? Same for the Schodde ref?
 * Sources look good. Links checked out okay with the link checker tool. Ealdgyth - Talk 02:07, 28 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Done. Both monographs from which multiple page refs were taken are now at bottom. Cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 02:55, 28 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Great, thanks! All done here! Ealdgyth - Talk 03:07, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

Support- First of all, I am a WikiProject Bird editor, but did not work with this article before a final go-through just before the FAC. All of my issues (outlined on the article's talk page) are now resolved, and I think that the prose is above the level now with the copyediting that has happened since Tony's comment. It is a thorough and complete article, and while more pictures would be nice, there are none available and I don't think that that should prevent the article from becoming an FA. Therefore, I support. Rufous-crowned Sparrow (talk) 03:37, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

Comment Guettarda (talk) 02:52, 31 May 2008 (UTC)
 * "the Maluridae family"? Wouldn't "the family Maluridae" (or "Maluridae, the XXX family") flow better? (done - I'm not fussed whether 'fairy-wren' is left in or out, whichever flows better)
 * "this species has a marked sexual dimorphism" or "this species has marked sexual dimorphism"? (removed 'a' and changed to 'displays', which was the verb used in all my bird books)
 * "The female is sandy-brown with light-blue tail feathers and is smaller than the male, which, in breeding plumage, has a bright-blue body, black bill, and white wings" - I think this would do better split into two sentences, or perhaps "The female is sandy-brown with light-blue tail feathers and is smaller than the male, which has a bright-blue body, black bill, and white wings when in breeding plumage." (duly split, well a semicolon anyway but can easily be a full stop)
 * "Younger, but sexually mature males are almost indistinguishable from females and are often the breeding males"; maybe "Younger sexually mature males are almost indistinguishable from females. These are often the breeding males". (yup, done)
 * "Thus a troop of White-winged Fairy-wrens seen in spring and summer comprises a brightly coloured older male accompanied by small, inconspicuous brown birds, many of which are actually male." I'd say ditch the "Thus"; I think it would read better without it. ('k)
 * "Three subspecies are recognised, one is found on Dirk Hartog Island and another on Barrow Island off the coast of Western Australia" - either "Three subspecies are recognised. One is found on Dirk Hartog Island and another on Barrow Island off the coast of Western Australia" or "Three subspecies are recognised: one on Dirk Hartog Island and another on Barrow Island off the coast of Western Australia". (oops, forgot to mention mainland form there. done anyway)
 * "The White-winged Fairy-wren, which mainly eats insects, is found in heathland and arid scrubland, where low shrubs provide cover" - I don't think "which mainly eats insects" belongs in the middle of a sentence on distribution. (duly splitted)


 * Well-spotted. I am happy for input into how I can improve the article :) Cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 03:11, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

Comment Some more: Taxonomy
 * the last two paragraphs don't really flow with the first two. The first two paragraphs are historical, and the fourth para starts historical, but the third para is not.  The statement that it is in the Maluridae is made (albeit indirectly) in the fourth para, so it doesn't need to be made in the third.  I would suggest moving the fourth para up, and then merging the third para into it.
 * (moved para 3 past para 4 and changed beginning so it segues nicely.actually works quite well!)

Evolutionary history: Description: Behaviour: Feeding Courtship Predators and threats
 * Subspecies
 * why "at present"? If there were more subspecies, you should say so.  If there is a move to change the number of rank of some groups, say so.  Otherwise, "at present" is unnecessary. (there were historically more, but no future plans I know of)
 * talking about genetic distance and then moving into physical distance is likely to confuse some readers.
 * "There are three theories" - no; three theories have been proposed/published/have attracted much attention.
 * I think that "nuptially plumed" either needs to be linked, or you need simpler language. I don't think "nuptially plumed" is accessible to our target readers.
 * "The White-winged Fairy-wren is particularly well adapted to dry environments"? Why "particularly? Relative to what? (ok, removed. Well, to other birds really but agree the 'particularly' is redundant)
 * This sentence has too many distinct ideas: "Hopping, with both feet leaving the ground and landing simultaneously, is the usual form of locomotion, though birds may run when performing the rodent-run display" (switched and split)
 * "Clans have 2–4 birds, that typically consist of one brown or partially blue male and a breeding female" - how about "Clans consist of 2–4 birds, typically one brown or partially blue male and a breeding female" (I like it. done)
 * I think the first sentence would be more readable if it were split into two. (into twain it shall be (well almost - I used a semicolon))
 * "and many broods are brought up a by male other than the natural father"; how about "and many broods are brought up a by male who is not their natural father" (done)
 * I don't understand this sentence: "Another threat to the birds is from humans; many nests are destroyed during breeding season by human habitation (and even the occasional bird watcher) because the nests are hidden close to the ground and therefore difficult for passers-by to spot"; how is "human habitation" a threat? (by trampling. In fact, that is a useful word which encompasses much of what was in the aforesaid sentence)

Guettarda (talk) 03:28, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

Oh, and support. Guettarda (talk) 03:30, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

Support I can't believe that Mr. Fungus writes articles about cute creatures. I read it over and I could find only one confusing statement which I fixed. Good article. Orange Marlin Talk• Contributions 06:31, 31 May 2008 (UTC)
 * comment the section on vocalizations could use more citations. There are two sources given at the end there. It isn't clear to me which statements in that section are using which for citation. JoshuaZ (talk) 17:19, 31 May 2008 (UTC)
 * ''(there have been two significant published articles on the vocalisations which found similar results (which I have stated at the beginning of the para). Rather than pepper several points with refs from either or both I felt both at the end. I figured it was better this way. If there is a consensus that it should have refs all the way through which will be repeated and sometimes duplicated then I will do it, but it won't be pretty... :) Cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 22:06, 31 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Support. That's satisfactory as is then. Oh, and just to make it clear support. JoshuaZ (talk) 02:06, 1 June 2008 (UTC)


 * Thanks. The referencing bit can be tricky sometimes, though a long-term solution may be optional visible ones. Cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 02:17, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

Just a few piddly points
 * I think this bit "The female is sandy-brown with light-blue tail feathers; it is smaller than the male, which, in breeding plumage, has a bright-blue body, black bill, and white wings." would be better split. It starts with the girls and moves on to the boys. (split. good pick up as I had forgotten female bill colour. kept the same order for flow)
 * Under taxonomy it doesn't quite hang together where it says it was called various kinds of Superb Warbler and then says "The White-winged Fairy-wren was originally named the Blue-and-white Wren,". (good pick up. changed as not original per se, just an older name)
 * In "description" you've used "molt" and "moult" in the same sentence. (aagh. US spelling! fixed)
 * Pardon my ignorance, but is "coverts" plural here: "The breeding males' blue plumage, particularly the ear-coverts, is highly iridescent due "? (tricky this. The subject of the sentence is the singular 'plumage', with the plural 'coverts' in a little clause)
 * In behaviour - should Wing-fluttering display be wing-fluttering display? Similarly Rodent run using a cap in the middle of a sentence. (yup. missed those ones)
 * This "parasitism by the Shining Bronze-Cuckoo (C. lucidus) and Black-eared Cuckoo (C. osculans) is rarely recorded.[48]" should probably be a separate sentence.Fainites barley 21:13, 2 June 2008 (UTC) (done)

Well that's me easily pleased.
 * Support Fainites barley 21:31, 2 June 2008 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.