Wikipedia:Featured article review/Marginated Tortoise/archive1


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

The article was removed 00:02, 20 March 2008.

Review commentary

 * Notified WikiProject Amphibians and Reptiles

This article was promoted way back in 2004. The most glaring issue is inline citations. They are practically nonexistent in several sections, and although sources are provided in a references section, it can't be identified which source cites which statement. Furthermore, the prose seems more like a pet-caring guide, rather than the "professional standard" in the FAC. The prose is occasionally confusing to read, such as in the "Systematics" section, and short, one-sentence paragraphs chop up the prose. Overall, I believe that the article does not meet the current standards for FA.  bibliomaniac 1  5  21:48, 7 February 2008 (UTC)


 * OK, I'd think it needs:
 * 1) . a description
 * 2) . expand on taxonomy, what and how named
 * 3) . habitat notes in the distrib. and hab. section. Where does it live ?
 * 4) . fix lead
 * 5) . big copyedit
 * 6) . judicious pruning of images and promotions of commons.
 * 7) . notes on how common it is in cultivation and about cultivation, not a how-to guide.

Not insignificant Bit worse than I thought, but doable. Luckily is a well-demarkated article. cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 22:16, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

FARC commentary

 * Suggested FA criteria concerns are citations, comprehensiveness, and prose. Joelito (talk) 13:56, 3 March 2008 (UTC)


 * Remove per criterion 1c. LuciferMorgan (talk) 09:18, 12 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Remove per 1c. Also a large amount of short sentences that are simply bulleted together.  Blnguyen  ( vote in the photo straw poll ) 03:36, 18 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Remove (sigh) - the nub is that the information required to bring this up to par will be in books more than online. Oh well, sometime in the future...Cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 19:58, 18 March 2008 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.