Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/White-necked Rockfowl/archive1

White-necked Rockfowl

Featured article candidates/White-necked Rockfowl/archive1

Nominator(s): Rufous-crowned Sparrow (talk) 18:30, 1 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I am nominating the White-necked Rockfowl article because I believe it is a comprehensive overview of the species, well-written and well-illustrated with the materials available, and that it meets the criteria. The White-necked Rockfowl is an odd, elusive species, composing half of a unique family of African birds. It nests in caves and rarely flies for any considerable distance. Thank you for reviewing the article. Rufous-crowned Sparrow (talk) 18:30, 1 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Source review - spotchecks not done. Nikkimaria (talk) 03:28, 2 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Be consistent in how you notate multi-author sources
Be consistent in how you punctuate initials
Retrieval dates in YYYY-MM-DD format should use hyphens
Not sure this ref is really helpful or necessary
Some books missing ISBNs
Multi-page refs like FN 32 need page numbers
Be consistent in whether ISBNs are hyphenated or not
FN 30: publisher? Nikkimaria (talk) 03:28, 2 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

To the best of my knowledge I have addressed your concerns. Except for the editors of Handbook of Birds of the World, all multi-author sources are presented in the same way, and the format for citing multiple editors doesn't seem to permit a different presentation to allow HBW to conform. Per the dictionary reference, it is supporting how the word "pied" is derived from "magpie" and therefore supports the use of the Latin word for magpie in the genus name. At least one bird editor desired clarification on this linguistic chain, and the ref is supporting that. I've left it in for the moment. Thank you for looking at this. Rufous-crowned Sparrow (talk) 05:44, 2 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

A better ref for the derivation of "pied" from "magpie" is Brookes, Ian (editor-in-chief) (2006). The Chambers Dictionary, ninth edition. Edinburgh: Chambers. p. 1138. ISBN 0550101853. {{cite book}}: |first= has generic name (help) Jimfbleak - talk to me? 15:53, 2 November 2011 (UTC) just seen Shyamal's edit[reply]

Shyamal's book disproved an internet resource, therefore removing the need for the dictionary reference. ISBN has been added to the new ref. Thank you. Rufous-crowned Sparrow (talk) 21:43, 4 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Link check - no DAB-links, no dead external links, 1 overlink fixed. GermanJoe (talk) 21:48, 3 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Comments - great article on a rare and poorly known species.I made a few changes, feel free to revert if you don't like them. Some comments:
- Perhaps give the family name in the first line? While using informal names is fine, I think this is significant enough to warrant inclusion as well.
- Lead says This bird is believed to be long-lived., Text says This species is long-lived.. Why the uncertainty in the lead but not the main text? How long is long, or is that not known? Do we have any ages for zoo specimens?
- The head is nearly featherless with bright yellow skin except for two large, circular black patches located just behind the eyes. Is unclear if this means the black patches are feathered or not.
- Despite its secretive nature, some natives of Sierra Leone considered the species to be a protector of the home of their ancestral spirits. Non sequitur. Why would the secretive nature (or not) have any bearing on the belief systems of locals? Also, and this is personal taste, I dislike the term native. It may not be meant in the colonial sense, but it could stand to be reworded a bit.
- I'd suggest that conservation is a subheading of Relationship with humans.
This is good and I'll support soon. Sabine's Sunbird talk 05:32, 7 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for reviewing, and good catches. No reference puts a number on the species' lifespan, though the reference used does state it is a long-lived species. I'll think about moving conservation under Relationship with humans; while the White-necked Rockfowl's section almost entirely deals with humans, I like a roughly standard template for headings, and in some cases Conservation may have little to do with humans; for example, what I've read suggests that the Labrador Duck was going extinct naturally and that humans had little impact. Thanks. Rufous-crowned Sparrow (talk) 06:24, 7 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I agree it shouldn't be inflexible, but in this instance the decline and efforts to save both strongly involve us. Sabine's Sunbird talk 07:09, 7 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Fair enough. Done. Rufous-crowned Sparrow (talk) 19:33, 7 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Support; Great, thanks for the changes. I've contacted a Flickr User to see if we can't get a photo of a live bird. Sabine's Sunbird talk 19:52, 7 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your review. Rufous-crowned Sparrow (talk) 04:43, 8 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Comments:

I wonder, since you mention the Grey-necked Rockfowl in the text and its range is displayed on the map, whether it is worth noting that in the map's caption. Given they are said to be related, this helps geographically to illustrate this.
~~"Two eggs are laid twice a year." This isn't mentioned in the body, at least not in these definite numbers (rather "One to two eggs").~~
"It used to be believed that the rockfowl rarely ventures far from its breeding grounds; however, new information suggests that the species has a much broader range than previously thought." Aside from a brief history of study of the Rockfowl, this doesn't really say much. Is it known how far the bird may venture?
~~Some repeating of cites. If several sentences are covered by the same source, it should be fine to have a single cite at the end of the last sentence.~~

I made a few minor edits to the text; review and revert as necessary. Apterygial (talk) 07:54, 13 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for reviewing the article. The first two changes have been made, and your differences look good (and taught me some things). It is not known how far the White-necked Rockfowl ventures; however, the fact that it does is of interest, particularly as it appears that the Grey-necked does not, and as earlier reports contradict this, the history of rockfowl thought bit clarifies this for readers who may read an older resource. I also removed two extra refs where the following sentence implied continuation of thought. Thanks. Rufous-crowned Sparrow (talk) 17:51, 13 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

That's fine. My personal attitude is that one cite can follow several sentences if it can support it; continuation of thought is not important. But I can see your logic, and it's far from a sticking point. Apterygial (talk) 00:59, 14 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Support: I'm happy with the changes with the article that were made following my suggestions. Apterygial (talk) 00:59, 14 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]