Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Variegated Fairy-wren

The following is an archived discussion of a featured article nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured article candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.

The article was promoted 16:28, 18 November 2007.

[edit] Variegated Fairy-wren

I'm nominating this article for featured article because I feel it is as comprehensive as possible, is properly referenced with inline citations, has a lead which summarises the article and illustrated with images directly uploaded to WP commons by the authors. I developed it at the same time as Splendid Fairy-wren and Superb Fairy-wren and didn't nominate it at the time as it was teh subject of a recent survey which was not published at the time. It is shorter than those bird articles as this species has been less studied. I have used some of the corrections to prose noted on the first to pages to assist in improving the prose of this one. cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 11:47, 5 November 2007 (UTC)

Comments Support I just gave the article a copyedit; however, there are a few phrases I'm confused about:

In the lead, it says that the bird was formerly known as... Why is this formerly and not also known as?

There's been a concerted effort in the last 20 years or so to reduce ambiguity in names of unrelated birds, much more common in Australia I suspect where there are many named after unrelated species, hence the Painted Button-quail was Painted Quail when I was a kid and all the wrens, were simply called that (eg Blue Wren, Variegated Wren etc.). The Fairy-wren has been part of a systemic push to 'fix' common names. Now that I write it, I figure we can leave it out as it is a discussion better placed on the genus page. cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 01:33, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

In the subspecies assimilis, who is North?

Good spot - Alfred John North - done cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 02:04, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

In the second paragraph of behavior, the first sentence uses the word either but does not give two examples. Should this be "or" or are there more reasons to carry flower petals that got lost along the way?

There is other speculative stuff, which I removed or reworded. In any case I've removed the either which was supposed to have gone before. cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 01:52, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

Could you completely redo the next sentence? It seems to either be missing parts or is worded poorly.

reworded to "In this species, the petals that have been recorded have been yellow." it's those passive tenses that make it sound weird...cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 01:55, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

In Reproduction first sentence, what does "under 1 m" refer to? Please rephrase.

reworded to "less than 1 m (3 ft) above the ground"cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 01:57, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

Other than these I think the article looks pretty good. However, is there a way to get a range map? I know Jude knows how to make them if you want to ask him... Rufous-crowned Sparrow 23:55, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

I'll drop him a line posthaste...cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 01:57, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the quick response. However, I made a mistake in my comments. I meant the sentence after the sentence after the one in Behavior. I thought that the previous one was fine. Sorry for any confusion. Rufous-crowned Sparrow 03:21, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

Nevermind, the whole section was a bit choppy and has benefited from a bit of a massage. done now cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 03:59, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

Looks good. Only other thing is a range map, but I don't think that that should hold the article back. I supported above. Good job. Rufous-crowned Sparrow 05:45, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

left a note for Jude to see if he's ok with it before i email him a chunky image file.... :) cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 12:28, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

Comments (starting at the end of the article, for no good reason at all!)

Diet

”The Variegated Fairy-wren is predominantly insectivorous, consuming a wide range of small creatures, mostly insects...” repetitious

Good spot - fixed. Easy to lose insectivorous in section. cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 12:31, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

Breeding

”the nest is a round or domed structure made of loosely woven grasses and spider webs, with an entrance in one side, generally less than 1 m (3 ft) above the ground and in thick vegetation” As it reads now, this means the entrance is less than 1 m above the ground. Is that correct, or is it the whole nest? (the nest - switched clauses to reduce ambiguity)

"A clutch of three or four matte white eggs with reddish-brown splotches and spots, measuring 12 x 16 mm (.45 x .6 in).” I think there’s a word or two missing here! :) (consists added)

“...after hatching, nestlings are fed and their fecal sacs removed by all group members for 10–12 days, by which time they are fledged.” This is worded a bit awkwardly. (removed 'after hatching' which is redudant)

“Parents and helper birds will feed them for around one month.” In addition to the time in the nest, or in total? (source doesn't specify, at least it is approximate)

“...though some can move on and breed in the first year” Any need for the “can”? (no, removed)

“Variegated Fairy-wrens also play host...” Any need for the “also”? (no, removed)

There aren’t many wikilinks in this section. How about nest, or eggs, or clutch or brood parasite? (done) cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 12:41, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

I'll have a look at the rest later—must dash at the moment! MeegsC | Talk 11:39, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

• Support
• Why not Australian spelling? ("ise" and variants, not "ize")? It's inconsistent, anyway. (ok, got the last -ized now)
• "Brightly-coloured"—Read MOS on hyphens. Happens again. (found both of 'em)
• "Distributed over 90% of the Australian continent, the Variegated Fairy-wren prefers scrubland with plenty of vegetation providing dense cover; with a preference for rocky outcrops and patches of Acacia, Eremophila or Lignum (Muehlenbeckia) in inland and northern Australia."—Semicolon is wrong. Lots of second clauses run on using "with"; this is not optimal. (fixed that one; not sure what you mean by others, I used CTRL-F to find other semicolons and none were followed by 'with'. Do you want me to remove 'with' from some subordinate clauses?)
• "for 14 to 16 days; nestlings are fed and their fecal sacs removed by all group members for 10–12 days"—consistent? (I added 'after which newly hatched' - to clarify. The eggs are sat on for 14-16 days then the babies are nursed for 10-12 days)
• Consider using "ALthough" in formal text. Tony (talk) 14:15, 9 November 2007 (UTC) (Oh, is that a deal-breaker? I was never really fond of 'although' and to me the latter is so soft that it is ofte nredundant. I was trying to find it on MOS, there was a bit on conjunctions somewhere wasn't there?)cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 06:24, 10 November 2007 (UTC)
• Support: Comprehensive and well-referenced. Any issues with prose that I noticed have already been outlined in comments by Tony. --heyjude. 03:14, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured article candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.