Talk:Blue Iguana

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Featured article star Blue Iguana is a featured article; it (or a previous version of it) has been identified as one of the best articles produced by the Wikipedia community. Even so, if you can update or improve it, please do.
Amphibians and Reptiles Portal
Blue Iguana is part of WikiProject Amphibians and Reptiles, an attempt at creating a standardized, informative, comprehensive and easy-to-use amphibians and reptiles resource. If you would like to participate, you can choose to edit this article, or visit the project page for more information.
Featured article FA This article has been rated as FA-class on the quality scale.
Low This article has been rated as low-importance on the importance scale.
Caribbean
Caribbean Portal
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Caribbean, an attempt to build a comprehensive guide to Caribbean, and areas of North America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit this article, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion. If you are new to editing Wikipedia visit the welcome page to become familiar with the guidelines.
Featured article FA This article has been rated as FA-class on the quality scale.
Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the importance scale.
This article is supported by the Cayman Islands work group. (with unknown importance)
Assessment comments

Contents

[edit] Cleanup

We need somone in the know to merge diffrnt pieces of material here that have obviously been copied. Chavatshimshon 03:56, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

I'm working on it! Mike Searson 03:21, 1 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Copyedit

Lead: Because it was semantically awkward, and on the principle that all adverbs are bad, I removed "strongly". I tried "closely", but that's empty cliche. I tried "diligently", but I realized that even I don't know what that means. "Hard" seemed too plain and to go without saying, one would hope. I think it moves more easily unencumbered by a modifier, but the primary editor can have a go if he wants. --Milkbreath 10:40, 25 September 2007 (UTC)

Further reading: The citations are raggedy as all hell. If anybody has these books, please fix. --Milkbreath 13:46, 25 September 2007 (UTC)

Fixed! All refs should be uniform!--Mike - Μολὼν λαβέ; 05:36, 15 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Passed GA nomination

GA review (see here for criteria)
  1. It is reasonably well written.
    a (prose): b (MoS):
  2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.
    a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):
  3. It is broad in its coverage.
    a (major aspects): b (focused):
  4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.
    Fair representation without bias:
  5. It is stable.
    No edit wars etc.:
  6. It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate.
    a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
  7. Overall:
    Pass/Fail: The sourcing is to be admired, congratulations! VanTucky Talk 20:02, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Some feedback

I always like to put scientific name in parentheses rather than comma, as this makes it less confusing if more subordinate clauses (and hence commas) are used. I'll look for other tweaks. Cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 10:28, 16 March 2008 (UTC)

  • climbing in trees... - is this really supposed to be "climbing in trees "? Sounds a bit odd. Cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 11:04, 16 March 2008 (UTC)
  • At the beginning of the Anatomy and morphology section I was initially confused by the different lengths cited. I would give the total length first and then remark it was made up of the body and tail lengths to minimise confusion. Cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 11:15, 16 March 2008 (UTC)
  • The male is larger than the female. - I think we need some idea of how much (percentage?) Cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 11:16, 16 March 2008 (UTC)
    • I made all these changes. Let me know if you find anymore of my slop that needs a revamp!--Mike - Μολὼν λαβέ 16:05, 16 March 2008 (UTC)
      • OK, I am not sure but it took me a couple of reads to figure out what was happening with the repopulation and where it was coming from. I will have to read it again and figure out if there needs to be any clarification. Looking not too bad though... :) Cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 20:39, 16 March 2008 (UTC)