Talk:Diademed Sifaka

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Diademed Sifaka was a good article nominee, but did not meet the good article criteria at the time. There are suggestions below for improving the article. Once these are addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake. Reviewed version: December 1, 2006

	Africa Portal This article is within the scope of the WikiProject Africa, which collaborates on articles related to Africa in Wikipedia. To participate, you can edit this article or visit the project page for more details.
Start	This article has been rated as Start-class on the quality scale.
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Madagascar.
Assessment comments This article has been rated for quality and/or importance but has no comments yet. If appropriate, please review the article and then leave comments here to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the article and what work it will need.

An entry from Diademed Sifaka appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know? column on 11 June 2006.

	Diademed Sifaka is part of WikiProject Primates, an attempt at creating a standardized, informative, comprehensive and easy-to-use primate resource. If you would like to participate, you can choose to edit this article, or visit the project page for more information.
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the quality scale.
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the importance scale.

[edit] Weasel words and expansion needed

(P. edwardsi is considered by some scientists to be a subspecies of P. diadema.)

This needs a citation and explanations: what criteria are used to separate them and what arguments to unite them? THat needs explanation in atleast one of the two articles. Circeus 03:39, 11 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Good article

This article appears to meet the criteria of GA. It has NPOV, good images, sources, adequate breadth, stable, and prose is satisfactory. Joan-of-arc 20:28, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Good Article Nomination Failed

On November 30, 2006, this article was nominated as a Good Article. I have taken some time to review it to determine if it meets the criteria for good article. Below are some observations:

• Please take a moment to review the Wikipedia Manual of Style (dates and numbers) article. A couple of issues that come to light in the article is that measurements should have a nonbreaking space code ( ) between the numbers and the units of measure. In addition, conversions of measurements should be provided. If you mention centimeters, put the equivalent number of inches in parentheses.

• Style guide issues: all of these have been addressed by new edits including conversions from metric and also the spacing issues. Anlace 02:30, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

• The article is inconsistent with its use of British vs. American spelling. Centimeter is American, Behaviour is British. Wikipedia community consensus is to go though the history of the article and the first use of American vs. British spelling is what should be used, unless the article describes a distinctly American or British topic (a lemur from Madagascar wouldn't fall into that category).

• Converted all spellings to consistent British. Most of the literature is in British spelling. Anlace 20:36, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

• Per Wikipedia's Manual of Style (Lead Section), the introductory paragraph should summarize the rest of the article. It should not introduce information that is not covered elsewhere.
• The sentence, "Mittermeier describes^[3] the Diademed Sifaka as "one of the most colorful and attractive of all the lemurs..." needs clarification. Who is Mittermeier, and why should I care what he thinks? I shouldn't have to look up the reference to find out his credentials.

• Sentence has been rewritten to show a self contained thought including Mittermeier's standing. Anlace 02:43, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

• The sentence, "An anomalous outlier population of P. diadema has been discovered in south central Madagascar, which manifests an array of different colourisations including at least one observation of an all black lemur." is very unclear.

• Sentence has been rewritten. Anlace 20:46, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

• The Range and Habitat section contains many facts and very few references. Statements like "The Diademed Sifaka is thought to be the mostly widely distributed member of the Propithecus genus" make me wonder, "Who thinks that?" The second paragraph of that section is completely unreferenced.

• Sentence has been rewritten to eliminate weasel words and supply source of distribution analysis. Anlace 18:15, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

• The sentence, "Specific locations for sighting the Diademed Sifaka are Mantadia National Park (approximately three hours in driving time from the capital city of Antananarivo." makes me think that something got cut out of that it.

• Sentence has been completed by consulting source. Anlace 18:15, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

• The Behaviour section is insufficiently referenced.

• Two additional line note references have been added. Anlace 22:02, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

• In all the article needs some significant copyediting to meet the "understandable by all" component of the good article criteria and to make the article flow better. I'll stop nitpicking specific sentences after this, but my last example to illustrate this point is the sentence, "For a large lemur, the Diademed Sifaka is rather athletic, being capable of lateral aerial propulsion of up to 30 kilometers per hour, a result of muscular leg thrusting action pushing off from a vertical tree trunk.". Compare that to (a hastily rewritten) "The Diademed Sifaka is more athletic than its large size would suggest. It is capable of leaping through the air at speeds of up to 30 kilometers per hour by pushing off from tree trunks with its very muscular legs"
• Comprehensiveness issues:
  • What is the estimated average lifespan of this animal?
    • The lifespan of 18 yrs was in the article when you reviewed it initially. Anlace 18:37, 11 December 2006 (UTC)
  • It is listed as an endangered species, how many of them are left? What are estimates for how much the population has declined from its historic levels?
    • Population estimates with reference are now provided. Regarding the trend, there seems to be no reliable source, although all the avialable studies suggest a generally declining population. I am leaning toward avoiding speculation and not suggesting trends. Anlace 18:27, 11 December 2006 (UTC)
  • What are its natural predators and causes of death?
    • Predators have been added to article with reference. Other causes of death are not given in literature. Anlace 22:02, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

Overall, it is my opinion that the article in its current form doesn't meet the criteria for Good Article status, but with some more work on it can reach that goal. Please feel free to renominate it after the issues I have outlined have been addressed. Thanks for your contributions. Neil916 (Talk) 06:13, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for the thorough review of this article Nei1916. I shall address the items you ve raised as i have time. Anlace 20:36, 8 December 2006 (UTC)