Talk:Cetaceans of the Caribbean

	This article was reviewed by member(s) of WikiProject Articles for creation. The project works to allow users to contribute quality articles and media files to the encyclopedia and track their progress as they are developed. To participate, please visit the project page for more information.Articles for creationWikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creationTemplate:WikiProject Articles for creationAfC articles
	This article was accepted from this draft on 29 December 2021 by reviewer Valereee (talk · contribs).

Caribbean Low‑importance

	Caribbean portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Caribbean, an attempt to build a comprehensive guide to the countries of the Caribbean 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.CaribbeanWikipedia:WikiProject CaribbeanTemplate:WikiProject CaribbeanCaribbean articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Cetaceans (inactive)

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Cetaceans, a project which is currently considered to be inactive.CetaceansWikipedia:WikiProject CetaceansTemplate:WikiProject CetaceansCetaceans articles

Marine life (inactive)

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Marine life, a project which is currently considered to be inactive.Marine lifeWikipedia:WikiProject Marine lifeTemplate:WikiProject Marine lifeMarine life articles

Comments for review

Latest comment: 3 years ago4 comments2 people in discussion

@Anomalocaris: Hi! Do I need to answer the comments you made before the draft is accepted or not, since it's mostly cosmetic? I will work on it but I may not have the time immediately. Thank you for your fast review anyway! Nereus&Co (talk) 13:09, 29 November 2021 (UTC)Reply

Nereus&Co: I'm not a reviewer. I think my recommendations are all good, but it's probably fair to say that draft reviewers are mainly looking for other things besides strict compliance with the WP:Manual of Style. —Anomalocaris (talk) 17:13, 29 November 2021 (UTC)Reply

@Anomalocaris: Ok thanks. I will check your recommendations anyway they are indeed necessary (the format of the references may take longer tough). Nereus&Co (talk) 17:18, 29 November 2021 (UTC)Reply

Everey species and genus should be in italic now. All ref are now after period or comma as asked (which I find strange). i think 2 letter postal abreviation are also corrected. Nereus&Co (talk) 02:06, 30 November 2021 (UTC)Reply

Note to the editors

Latest comment: 1 year ago1 comment1 person in discussion

In academic life not only the content but also the citation is very important. So adding bare references and not attempting to turn them into full citation is not a desired act. If you don't want to put your effort then why you started this article. There can be some bare references in any page, but the rate of the bare refs in this page is not reasonable. Wish there are much more strict rules against those who always put bare references. Egeymi (talk) 09:21, 28 May 2023 (UTC)Reply

Add topic