Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of wild mammal species in Florida

List of wild mammal species in Florida
Thanks to all who commented.

Checking against Featured list criteria:

1. It is useful, comprehensive, factually accurate, stable, uncontroversial and well-constructed.
 * (a) the table is "Useful".
 * (b) "Comprehensive": list all the wild mammal species in Florida as per The American Society of Mammalogists. Species from other sources not in the list are mentioned but not included in the list itself.
 * (c) "Factually accurate" The list comes from the list compiled by The American Society of Mammalogists from several sources. Common names are identified as they are used in their own Wikipedia articles, since they vary greatly. Scientific names were updated using the Red List. The meta:cite format is used.
 * (d) (e) (f) "Uncontroversial", "Stable", "Well-constructed": I hope so :-). The table will change once more species are introduced.

2. It complies with the standards:
 * (a) the lead summarizes the list scope.
 * (b) besides the lead, there is a little explanation on how the list was constructed.
 * (c) There are several tables in the article. The orders with more species have a separate table and smaller orders are grouped. All the lists are sortable. A table in the beginning summarize the species' counts. Introductory paragraphs explain how the species arrived in Florida and their current situation, going down to subspecies level.

3. Images: I added free pictures to each animal when possible. I uploaded several pictures myself when they were missing.

I would like to take this opportunity to thank for the peer review that some editors made.


 * Comments Nice riffing off List of mammals of Korea. The list manages to be independant and still very similar. However, I do not believe it is a good idea to present the IUCN status as is done. Information available only in images when it can (and arguably should) be text is not a good idea. This also obscure any particular status the species might have at state or county level (e.g. Tamias striatus is "Special Concern" in Florida, while Ursus americanus[specifically floridanus] is "Threatened".). Also, consider keeping with the 100px width. I think 150 gives the images a distracting prominence (and adds unnecessary whitespace). Circeus 02:21, 28 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Here are some tests on different sizing; commenters please vote on their favorite. I still like 150px better.About the threatened species, there are some problems related to it. The list is of species, not subspecies, so the threat level must be necessarily on species level; detail is provided on the introductory paragraphs. About the icons, I think they should stay how they are for keeping the same visual connection to other animal articles. The icons are ordered using soft keys.--Legionarius 02:47, 28 July 2007 (UTC)

-- Crzycheetah 21:40, 29 July 2007 (UTC)
 *  Comment Support
 * 1) The lead needs to summarize your list. Talk about terrestrial and marine mammals in one paragraph. You have a lot of text in those sections, so it won't be a problem for you to sumarize that. ✅ Actually, I am a bit stuck on that, since the individual paragraphs are very specific. Please, do you have any articles you could refer me to?--Legionarius 01:04, 30 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Actually, no, I don't. You could just write something like "there are terrestrial mammals of ...families and marine mammals of ...families." I also think that you can just expand the first paragraph, no need for the additional paragraph.-- Crzycheetah 18:21, 30 July 2007 (UT)
 * 1) hope it looks better now... please let me know.--70.60.86.178 16:34, 31 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Just what I needed. Thanks.-- Crzycheetah 17:23, 31 July 2007 (UTC)
 * 1) Mexican Gray Squirrel is the only red link; it would be better if it were a stub. ✅ somebody killed my redirect.--Legionarius 01:04, 30 July 2007 (UTC)
 * 2) I like the 120px size because the table get broken up at 100px and 150px is just too big. ✅. Good reasoning. left 120px for now.--Legionarius 01:04, 30 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Support Great referencing, absolutely spectacular use of graphics and photographs. Kudos. Geraldk 16:53, 7 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Support, very, very well done. Wizardman  02:15, 10 August 2007 (UTC)