Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of leporids/archive1


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

The list was promoted by Giants2008 via FACBot (talk) 00:25, 21 February 2022 (UTC).

List of leporids

 * Nominator(s):  Pres N  01:50, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

Another animal list! We continue our long journey through the mammals; having finished with the orders Carnivora (list of carnivorans + 9 sublists), aka "meat-eaters"; Artiodactyla (list of artiodactyls + 3 sublists), aka "hooved animals that aren't horses"; and Perissodactyla (list of perissodactyls + 0 sublists), aka "hooved animals that are horses (and tapirs, and rhinos)", we can now start on Lagomorpha, aka "things that are like rabbits". This subgroup is two families and a capstone list, and here is the first family list: list of leporids, the hares and rabbits. Turns out there's an awful lot of them: 73 species all over the world, and while there's a lot of differences between them they're all pretty recognizable as rabbits. Unlike prior lists, we have several redlinks here without pictures; there's been a lot of upheaval in the taxonomy of the South American cottontail rabbits in the last decade or so due to a few genetic studies, which hasn't made its way into nice Wikipedia articles yet. Thanks for reviewing! -- Pres N  01:50, 17 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Comments
 * Wikilink forbs, sedge, tubers, rhizomes as comparatively obscure words
 * "Grass and well as shrubs" - typo
 * Sagebrush is linked twice
 * That's all I got - great work as ever!! -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 08:45, 17 January 2022 (UTC)
 * All done, thanks! -- Pres N  14:37, 17 January 2022 (UTC)


 * Support -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 14:51, 17 January 2022 (UTC)


 * AryKun
 * "called an leporid" → "called a leporid"
 * Done


 * "colloquially hares and rabbits." → Since you use "a leporid" before this, shouldn't this be "a hare or rabbit"?
 * Done


 * Maybe link Sylvilagus instead of cottontail rabbit since it appears first.
 * Done


 * "IUCN red list" → Capitalize.
 * Done, somehow that's been missed for all the prior lists


 * Andean tapeti has an available image that should be added (it's in the article infobox).
 * Done, thanks! Not sure how that one got missed


 * Image in the lead needs alt text (and I question the usefulness of "gray rabbit" as an alt for every image).
 * Done; since the purpose of the images is to provide a visual representation of the named animal, there's not much useful for the alt text


 * Haven't checked the references, but nice work here, very little I could fault. AryKun (talk) 11:20, 19 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Although not needed, a review at the FLC for List of birds of Nauru would be appreciated.
 * Replied inline, thanks for reviewing! -- Pres N  19:49, 20 January 2022 (UTC)


 * Support

Image review from Kavyansh — Pass

 * File:Lepus hainanus.jpg — How do we know if it is c. 1900? The source does not mention that.
 * It does not indeed, don't know where they got that from; that said, the artist died in 1912 (John Gerrard Keulemans), so it would still be 100 years


 * File:Lepus coreanus.jpg — How is this CC-2.0 Korea? The source has an icon. Hovering over that tell me "Attribution", and it links to this page, which I think is CC-4.0 Korea.
 * I think it's because commons doesn't have a cc-by-4.0-kr template (or a 3.0). I've added that to the image page.
 * On another note, I think, writing that it has been licenced under cc-by-4.0-kr, and using the normal cc-by-4.0 tag would be much better. – Kavyansh.Singh (talk) 05:56, 26 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Agreed, done. -- Pres N  17:16, 26 January 2022 (UTC)


 * File:Lepus callotis side.jpg — Where is this pic from? Is it own work?
 * Unclear; replaced with a different picture (iNaturalist, cc-by-4.0).


 * File:Sylvilagus brasiliensis meridensis (Sylvilagus meridensis) - Museo Civico di Storia Naturale Giacomo Doria - Genoa, Italy - DSC02875.JPG — "Photography was permitted in the museum without restriction" is fine, but Italy does not have any freedom of panorama. See Freedom of panorama. The image is properly licenced, but the 3-D figure of that (rabbit, I'd say) is not.
 * Replaced


 * File:Nuttall's Cottontail (Sylvilagus nuttallii).jpg — How is this Government work?
 * Presumably because Justin Wilde, who only ever uploaded this one picture (and I can't find evidence that it was ever uploaded somewhere else before then), was a government employee on a government site (as he put in his edit summary), and so labelled it a government photo instead of pd-self.
 * I'll WP:AGF on that. – Kavyansh.Singh (talk) 05:56, 26 January 2022 (UTC)

That is it! Note: I did not check any maps, as I feel they mostly are appropriately licenced. – Kavyansh.Singh (talk) 13:15, 23 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Thanks! Responded inline. -- Pres N  16:54, 25 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Pass for all the leporids' images. – Kavyansh.Singh (talk) 17:18, 26 January 2022 (UTC)

Source review from Kavyansh — Pass
Rest, impeccable sourcing: all sources are reliable, properly/consistently formatted! – Kavyansh.Singh (talk) 14:03, 23 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Ref#104 — doi=10.1093/jmammal/gyz126, shouldn't the doi be marked as openly accessible?
 * Ref#123 — should be an en-dash, not em-dash in the title.
 * Johns Hopkins University Press should be linked in "Feldhamer, George A.; Thompson, Bruce Carlyle; Chapman, Joseph A. (2003). Wild Mammals of North America. Johns Hopkins University Press. ISBN 978-0-8018-7416-1."
 * Suggesting to archive the sources.
 * All done, thanks! -- Pres N  17:06, 25 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Pass for source review. – Kavyansh.Singh (talk) 05:59, 26 January 2022 (UTC)

Dank's comments

 * Standard disclaimer: I don't know what I'm doing, and I mostly AGF on sourcing.
 * Checking the FLC criteria:
 * 1. I've done some minor copyediting; feel free to revert or discuss. The (made to order) table coding seems fine. There are no sortable columns.
 * 2. The lead meets WP:LEAD and defines the inclusion criteria.
 * 3a. The list has comprehensive items and annotations.
 * 3b. The article is well-sourced to reliable sources, and the UPSD tool isn't indicating any actual problems (but this isn't a source review). All relevant retrieval dates appear to be present.
 * 3c. The list meets requirements as a stand-alone list, it isn't a content fork, it doesn't largely duplicate another article (that I can find), and it wouldn't fit easily inside another article.
 * 4. It is navigable.
 * 5. It meets style requirements. At a glance, the images seem fine (and cute!)
 * 6. It is stable.
 * Support - Dank (push to talk) 02:51, 7 February 2022 (UTC)

Giants2008 ( Talk ) 22:07, 20 February 2022 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.