Talk:Dragonet
This level-5 vital article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||
|
This article was the subject of an educational assignment in Fall 2013. Further details were available on the "Education Program:Washington University in St. Louis/Behavioral Ecology (Fall 2013)" page, which is now unavailable on the wiki. |
range
[edit]Does "western Indo-Pacific" mean the Indian Ocean, or what? —162.119.64.112 23:07, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
General Comments
[edit]1) Reproduction section
→The section contains different elements of reproduction/mating, and it definitely can be divided in to subsections (courtship, spawning, etc.)
→Part about sexual dimorphism should be located in a different section, or be placed properly in within the other text in the Reproduction section in order to fit appropriately.
2) Citing problems
→Citation needs to be made after each sentence in which claims are made, not all at the end of the paragraph
3) Clarifications
→Reproduction: "Both male and female dragonets have been observed in displaying..." Displaying what?
→Reproduction: What exactly is a water column?
→Reproduction: What do you mean by "one reproductive day"?
Jyn0309 (talk) 04:39, 29 October 2013 (UTC)
Suggested edits
[edit]General edits:
- Hyperlinks are needed
- The organization of sections is lacking
- Paragraphs get somewhat large; it would serve to cut them up
- Citations should go at the end of specific sentences, not all at the end of a paragraph.
Specific edits:
- Summary paragraph
- Insufficient. Add information inline with what is in the article below it.
- Description
- Types of fins and whatnot really need to be defined or at least hyperlinked.
- There is a dearth of citations. Fix that.
- Reproduction
- This section is too clumsy in structure. Cut it into 3-4 smaller paragraphs.
- Citations should be strewn throughout the text at the end of relative sentences, not all clumped at the end.
- Aggression
- Fix the title
- Consider expanding
- Hyperlinks!
- Fix citations
- Feeding
- Hyperlinks!
- Fix citations
- Locomotion
- Is this sections strictly necessary?
- Hyperlinks!
- Fix citations
- Aquariums
- The image screws up this section completely.
Bakerb4379 (talk) 00:29, 1 November 2013 (UTC)
Suggested Edits
[edit]Should have some information on what kind of habitats they prefer
Reproduction: uses some terms that aren’t defined (water column), maybe should consider defining it or linking it to a page about water columns if there is one
Reproduction: what does “one productive day” mean?
Reproduction section seems to run on, maybe consider making it more concise or splitting it up into three or so paragraphs
All sections: shouldn’t have all the citations at the end of the paragraph, they should be at the end of each sentence to which they correspond — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gopara (talk • contribs) 04:39, 1 November 2013 (UTC)
Recommended edits
[edit]Great job!! To raise to a Good article status, I recommend:
- Add "Distribution and habitat" section. It will be better if you can add a picture showing their distribution.
- Add "Taxonomy" section.
Hami910311 (talk) 20:39, 21 November 2013 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.252.110.213 (talk)
General Comments
[edit]Very good article! Contains lots of descriptive information but here are a few suggestions to help
- Physical Description: Second paragraph of this section has no references for all the information presented there
- Reproduction: Some of the information presented here are a little bit too in-depth, especially the numerical values. Maybe shorten it a bit and reduce unnecessary information
- Feeding: Likewise, some information such as expelling food after eating are a bit too in depth or unrelated to the topic at hand
- The later sections could maybe be combined with former sections, or expanded upon
- Locomotion: This section seems unnecessary and too detailed for wikipedia
- Defense: perhaps move this section up to the competition/aggression section? It could fit pretty well in there
- In the aquarium section, the picture seems unnecessary and throws off the flow of the article. Perhaps removing it might be best
MLiu19 (talk) 21:28, 21 November 2013 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.252.102.204 (talk)
Suggested Edits
[edit]- Try to add more sections/information to give a more comprehensive view of the fish.
- Try to add more images.
- Defense section is a little short. Try to incorporate elsewhere or include more information.
- If possible, try to break up the Reproduction section. It's a lot of text.