Talk:Chirocephalus diaphanus

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Chirocephalus diaphanus/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Ucucha 19:33, 8 June 2011 (UTC)

Overall, this looks good, but I have two concerns:

• The lead is too short; for an article this size, it should probably be a paragraph or two.
• The article focuses very much on Great Britain in places. Is it not protected in any other country? Also, there is no detail on its "circum-Mediterranean" distribution; does it occur around the Black Sea, for example?

Ucucha 19:33, 8 June 2011 (UTC)

I have expanded the lead as requested. (I had actually half planned to do this before the review began, but I forgot, and I was expecting a longer pause before the review began. That'll teach me for being pessimistic!) Your second point is also entirely fair. I have expanded the distribution section using a reference I had overlooked before. (It does indeed reach the Black Sea coast.) I have re-worded it as "Mediterranean" rather than "circum-Mediterranean", since C. diaphanus does not appear to occur in North Africa or the Middle East. I have failed, however, to answer the question of conservation in other countries. I don't think it is protected anywhere else, but I haven't been able to find a source that says so explicitly. GB is at the edge of its range, so it would make sense that it is less abundant there. I have seen some papers dealing with restricted areas, such as the former Yugoslavia (doi:10.1023/A:1003190231584) and Italy (doi:10.1023/A:1003701004970), where it is common and widespread. Poland is the only other country which might have some sort of legal protection in place, but I can find no mention of any legal protection for C. diaphanus outside the UK. --Stemonitis (talk) 09:32, 9 June 2011 (UTC)

It is apparently listed in Rheinland-Pfalz (however that is spelled in English) as "threatened with extinction"; see [1]. Also, it is listed in an index to a federal German Red List [2] as category 1 (which may also be "threatened with extinction" if the categories are the same as in Rheinland-Pfalz). This makes it look like it's also protected in Germany, but the table is weird. See also de:Anlage 1 zur Bundesartenschutzverordnung#Streng geschützte Krebse. It's also listed as endangered in the French region of Champagne-Ardennes [3]. Ucucha 09:49, 9 June 2011 (UTC)

Also, this report (p. 194 in the PDF) says it is threatened in the Netherlands, and that it occurs in South Limburg (not sure how detailed you want to get with the range, but that in itself might deserve a mention). This paper from 2000 reports the discovery of the species in the Netherlands. This resolution (linking the Google Docs version, since the original version appears missing) says this is the only occurrence of C. diaphanus in the Benelux, and the organization (from Lower Austria, so what they are doing in Limburg is unclear to me) decides to protect the shrimp's habitat there.

You should decide for yourself how much of this deserves inclusion, but it seems clear that it is rare and endangered across the northwestern European portion of its range. Ucucha 10:03, 9 June 2011 (UTC)

Interesting. I don't think it's appropriate to get into conservation status at subnational levels, but I have gladly added a mention of the German federal listing. For the other areas, there is nothing more than a statement that it's endangered, without conferring any kind of legal protection. The Naturschutzbund Niederösterreich, for instance, merely "emphatically endorses" the purchase of land, rather than actually doing anything. Nonetheless, I have added a mention of Benelux to the distribution section, since it is precise information and is applied over a reasonably large scale. --Stemonitis (talk) 20:24, 9 June 2011 (UTC)

Thanks; I'll now pass the article. Ucucha 13:05, 11 June 2011 (UTC)