Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Krill

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[edit] Krill

This article is about the group of krill, important animals of the plankton. It covers the different species in all areas of the world, their taxonomy, geographical distribution, morphology, behaviour, life cycle, ecology and economy. I started the article in May 2003 and many contributed since, especially user:Lupo did a great job.

• nominate and support Uwe Kils 22:34, July 9, 2005 (UTC)
• Heck, I had put it on Wikipedia:Peer review/Krill just four days ago and had planned to give it more time there. Uwe has now pre-empted this process without my knowing it... Someone else has already closed the peer review; I guess we may just as well continue here. Support, by the way. Lupo 07:17, July 10, 2005 (UTC)

good things often go fast Uwe Kils 14:53, July 10, 2005 (UTC)

• Support. Of course. Phils 09:58, 10 July 2005 (UTC)
• Support. Great article on an important but underappreciated group of animals. There are a few things I'd like to mention/ask. None of these are important enough for me to oppose if they're not done.
  • Could we get a clearer picture for the taxbox? It's not clear what we're looking at.
    • you could mount Northern Krill Uwe Kils 02:19, July 11, 2005 (UTC)
      • I didn't want to use an image of an individual krill such as Image:Meganyct.jpg because (a) this article is not about a particular species, and (b) krill occur in swarms, and thus the NOAA image struck me as particularly appropriate. Lupo 07:45, July 11, 2005 (UTC)
  • Could someone clarify the Norwegian etymology in the lead?
    • Done. I just followed my dictionary, I do not know Norwegian :-) Lupo 07:45, July 11, 2005 (UTC)
  • Is 10 body lengths per second "leisurely?"
    • It's "less than 10 body lengths/sec". For animals 1 to 2 cm long, than means at most 10 to 20 cm per second: yes, I'd call that leisurely. Lupo 07:45, July 11, 2005 (UTC)
      • Rephrased without the "leisurely": it implies a human POV. For the krill themselves, it may be quite fast, actually. :-) Lupo 11:32, July 11, 2005 (UTC)
  • Perhaps clarify the life stages, either in the article itself or by getting rid of the red links for pseudometanaupilus et. al.
    • I do not think that this article is the right place to go into detail on the life stages. I trust my fellow Wikipedians to help make these red links blue... Uwe? Lupo 07:47, July 11, 2005 (UTC)
      • I have added a little bit more on the development of the larval stages. I still think a comprehensive treatment should go into a spin-off article, maybe Larval development of krill, or even Larval development of crustaceans, where krill could get a section—and others, too, like shrimp (c.f. Life cycle of shrimps). Lupo 06:32, July 12, 2005 (UTC)
  • Perhaps mention their predators earlier in the article (like the end of the second lead paragraph). I'd like to see whales a bit more prominent in the article.
    • Some of the main predators, including whales, are mentioned in the very first paragraph of the lead. Also, whales are but one kind of animal that feeds upon them; there are many other, such as Crabeater Seals, that almost exclusively feed upon krill. Lupo 07:47, July 11, 2005 (UTC)
  • Could you add something on parasites of Krill to the ecology section? A quick google search found that there are some ectoparasites from the family Dajidae. See for example this monster 2 megabyte PDF. I can add this myself if you'd prefer.
    • I'll look into that. Lupo 07:47, July 11, 2005 (UTC)
      • Unfortunately I can't: the link you gave requires a login, which I do not have. And I'm not going to shell out US$30.– for one article! Lupo 07:52, July 11, 2005 (UTC)
        • Added a brief mention... (plus the reference). Lupo 08:52, July 11, 2005 (UTC)
  • By the way, I like the footnote system you used. It would make a perfect replacement for the footnotes in the Myxobolus cerebralis article I worked on.
    • Glad to see I'm not the only one who likes it :-) Lupo 07:47, July 11, 2005 (UTC)
• Dave (talk) 17:18, July 10, 2005 (UTC)

• Support I think this article is of sufficiently high standard to be featured. I also agree with Lupo that maybe their should be a seperate article describing in greater detail the lifecycle of crustaceans. Well done on a good article.Yakuzai 10:04, 12 July 2005 (UTC)
• Support Overall goodness...commentsI personally don't like the reference system used - what are the coded abbreviations all about? Confusing. Are there any high quality external links that could be added? ike9898 10:40, July 12, 2005 (UTC)
  • On the symbolic references, see Wikipedia:Peer review/Krill and Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Antarctic krill (Response to Taxman's question). On external links: you mean, besides those already in the references section? None that I know of, except maybe Uwe's publications at Wikisource, but those are on E. superba, not on krill in general. (And they're already linked from Antarctic krill.) Lupo 10:54, July 12, 2005 (UTC)
    • Actually, I've found one literature reference and two extlks to species identification guides. I've added them under a new section "Further reading". Lupo 08:31, July 14, 2005 (UTC)
• Support. Briangotts 03:05, 14 July 2005 (UTC)
• Support. Quite good stuff. But as in the Antarctic Krill article, since the citation system is not a widely known one (I'd never seen it before, so it can't be widely known of course), both articles would be that much the better for an explanation of it. Best way might be to write a stub article on the system. If it is important enough to use, it should have an article. Then the references section could link to the description by saying, these citations are in foo form. Or if you don't want to write an article, at least explain the system at the end of the references section. Oh and now that I'm curious, do you have any more info on the mechanism of bioluminescence Krill have? - Taxman ^Talk 12:18, July 15, 2005 (UTC)

  Hmmm. No, I don't, and neither does Wikipedia: Bioluminescence is silent on the issue of the precise mechanism(s). However, from one of the extlks of that article I found this page, which explains it all. How authoritative that website is, I do not know. I have never seen the term "euphausiid shrimp" for "krill" before... Lupo 15:19, July 15, 2005 (UTC)

• Support I'm not a regular to this page, but Uwe drew my attention to it, and it's a great article. There's a good length of information, and a picture to illustrate each point. Good job. The reference list is pretty impressive too! :-) --Fir0002 23:03, July 16, 2005 (UTC)