Talk:Pennatomys

GA Review

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

Reviewer: J Milburn (talk) 22:39, 2 January 2011 (UTC)

Feel free to tell me to go away, but you're good to work with, write well and write interesting articles. As such, I'll review this too. J Milburn (talk) 22:39, 2 January 2011 (UTC)

Thanks; looking forward to your review. This one is likely to be my next FAC. Ucucha 22:52, 2 January 2011 (UTC)

• "Samuel Turvey and coworkers" seems an odd phrase. Perhaps explain who Turvey is? List the "coworkers"?
  • Zoologist, added. I'd prefer not to list the other authors (they're in the reference list and the taxobox, though); long lists of names aren't especially relevant to Pennatomys.
• "only occurring on islands" Which islands? Any islands?
  • The Galápagos, Fernando de Noronha, Tres Marías, Jamaica, Lesser Antilles. It doesn't especially matter which islands; the point is that clade D (with ~30 living species) contains >10 island endemics, whereas there are only a few among the >400 other species of Sigmodontinae.
• "bears week crests" I assume you mean "bears weak crests"?
  • Oops.
• "toothrows" Can that be a single word? OED Online doesn't know it.
  • It's always written as one word in the literature.
• Why do you put "Nectomys subclade" in quotes all the time?
  • No good reason; removed.
• I take it there is nothing that can be said about any part of the animal other than the skull?
  • They did get some postcranial bones, but didn't describe them.
    • Annoying. Perhaps mention that some other bones have been found? J Milburn (talk) 14:34, 3 January 2011 (UTC)
• "Amerindian" Link?
  • Linked in an earlier section.
• In "Range and history", could we have links to the ages and locations?
  • I linked the places, but don't see much of a point in linking the ages; no one reading this article is going to be helped much by the knowledge that there was a revolt in the Byzantine Empire in 790.
• "George Percy reported on the presence of "great store of Conies" on Nevis around 1606," What are Conies?
  • "A term of endearment for a woman", according to the OED. It is originally a term for rabbits, but was also applied to other kind-of-similar animals, like hyraxes (in the KJV, apparently) and American rodents such as hutias (cf. Jamaican Coney), agoutis, and guinea pigs.
• "respectively Saint Kitts and Nevis," I've never seen "respectively" used before the listed items
  • Changed.
• Category:Monotypic mammal genera? Category:Extinct mammals? Category:Fauna of the Lesser Antilles is perhaps appropriate, perhaps not as the species is extinct- your call.
  • All added.

As you're hoping to take this to FAC, here are a few more thoughts-

• I'm personally interested by the human side of things- any more on those rats being eaten? Any theory as to why the species is now extinct?
  • Turvey et al. (2010) don't say much on specifically this species, but make some general points, which I've added.
• There's no mention of what they may have eaten. Possibly a related point, the thought about them being semi-aquatic is interesting; Do the authors make the jump and suggest that this species is semi-aquatic? What does this tell us? Are we talking fresh water or salt water?
  • They actually say West Indian rice rats were probably not semiaquatic; the morphology of Megalomys suggests it was arboreal. Living semiaquatic oryzomyines such as the marsh rice rat will enter salt water, though—which is unlikely to have put them at a disadvantage for colonizing oceanic islands.
    • Anything reliable sources have hypothesised about the species' behaviour/the way it would live would be a great addition to the article. As I say, this was just a thought for pushing towards FAC, so I'm not gonna hold back GA status on the issue. J Milburn (talk) 14:34, 3 January 2011 (UTC)
• How big is a "medium-sized oryzomyine"?
  • The source isn't any more specific. The toothrow measurement suggests it was slightly bigger than Sigmodontomys aphrastus, which reaches a head-and-body length of ~150 mm—but quite a bit smaller than Lundomys (the largest living oryzomyine), with an average HBL of 193 mm. Ucucha 14:13, 3 January 2011 (UTC)

Generally great, as usual. Sources good, no stability or image problems. I'm gonna place it on hold for now. J Milburn (talk) 23:14, 2 January 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for the detailed review! Ucucha 14:13, 3 January 2011 (UTC)

Everything I thought needed dealing with before GA status has been dealt with, so I'm happy to promote. I've left some more quick thoughts above to have a think about with a view to FA status (and, as ever, a picture would be a great addition, but I appreciate the difficulty), but I'm happy to promote now. Nice work, and good luck! J Milburn (talk) 14:34, 3 January 2011 (UTC)

Pennatomys nivalis or Pennatomys

Just a question, many pages about a species and a genus combined are under the species name? Is that incorrect, or should this page be at Pennatomys nivalis? -- Kim van der Linde ^{at venus} 18:14, 3 January 2011 (UTC)

We tend to place monotypic genera under the genus name, unless that name is ambiguous (e.g., Ambondro mahabo); it's shorter and more in line with normal usage in the literature. Ucucha 17:07, 3 January 2011 (UTC)

Okay, because in WP:BIRD, it is the other way round. Thank you for the explanation. -- Kim van der Linde ^{at venus} 18:14, 3 January 2011 (UTC)

If there is a common name, that is; and that is also true in mammals. Ucucha 18:34, 3 January 2011 (UTC)

Ha, that is where I missed the point. Thank you! -- Kim van der Linde ^{at venus} 18:35, 3 January 2011 (UTC)

• It is monotypic genus as the title unless the title is a primary topic of something else. So this should be moved. FunkMonk (talk) 08:20, 11 July 2022 (UTC)

Common name

The IUCN lists three common names. Should we suppressed these names? Nevis Rice Rat, St. Eustatius Rice Rat, or St. Kitts Rice Rat --Melly42 (talk) 19:18, 8 April 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Pennatomys. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140627094911/http://www.iucnredlist.org/ to http://www.iucnredlist.org/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 18:33, 19 May 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Pennatomys. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110521154239/http://www.bucknell.edu/msw3/browse.asp?id=13000001 to http://www.bucknell.edu/msw3/browse.asp?id=13000001

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 23:44, 21 September 2017 (UTC)

Requested move 11 July 2022

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: moved per request. Favonian (talk) 10:41, 18 July 2022 (UTC)

---

Pennatomys nivalis → Pennatomys – Per TOL guidelines, monotypic genera should be covered at the genus level. FunkMonk (talk) 08:21, 11 July 2022 (UTC)

• Support per nom and WP:MONOTYPICFAUNA. YorkshireExpat (talk) 12:43, 13 July 2022 (UTC)
• Comment: I think to run such debates while an article is on the Main page while it is move-protcted is not a good idea. This could have ben discussed during the preparation, and if missed then, could be discussed in three days. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:38, 15 July 2022 (UTC)

I saw it because it was about to become TFA (this request is two days old). Doesn't matter when it's done, as long as it's done. We could temporarily remove the maintenance tag, of course. FunkMonk (talk) 08:40, 15 July 2022 (UTC)

I have done so, until TFA is complete. Arbitrarily0 ^(talk) 10:27, 15 July 2022 (UTC)

I don't think this move is contraversial. Could just have been done in my opinion. YorkshireExpat (talk) 10:32, 15 July 2022 (UTC)

• Support per nom. AryKun (talk) 08:47, 15 July 2022 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Sorry for missing this. For the record, the article became an FA under the correct title, but was moved without discussion last year: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Pennatomys&diff=prev&oldid=1011484328. Ucucha (talk) 00:38, 19 July 2022 (UTC)

Ah, by a now banned user, even. That user was wreaking havoc across many articles a while back. FunkMonk (talk) 07:30, 19 July 2022 (UTC)