Talk:Pest (organism)/GA1

GA Review

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch

Reviewer: Ajpolino (talk · contribs) 17:50, 12 May 2020 (UTC)

I can take this review on. I'll have a minute to get through the article sometime in the next few days. Looking forward to the read! Ajpolino (talk) 17:50, 12 May 2020 (UTC)

Many thanks for taking this on. Cwmhiraeth and I will address your comments shortly. Chiswick Chap (talk) 19:12, 12 May 2020 (UTC)

@Cwmhiraeth and Chiswick Chap: The changes look great! One thing is marked "Done" but appears unchanged (commented below); regardless this article clearly passes the GA criteria now. Excellent work all! A pleasure to read. Also an early congratulations to the co-nom for what appears to be a relatively smooth RfA. I hope all are well. Ajpolino (talk) 15:38, 13 May 2020 (UTC)

@Ajpolino: Thank you for the review. See my response below. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 18:04, 13 May 2020 (UTC)

Review criteria:

1. It is reasonably well written.

a (prose, spelling, and grammar): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):

• The prose is generally excellent. Some suggested copyedits for reading ease (feel free to skip any you disagree with):

• Lead - The beginning of the 3rd paragraph is momentarily jarring as it departs from the style of the paragraph above (i.e. [Pest-y activity], [list of some pests]). Flipping the ideas of that paragraph's first and second sentences might smooth things out.

Done. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 05:42, 13 May 2020 (UTC)

The paragraph looks the same as before I think? The sentences I was referring to were The animal groups of the greatest importance as agricultural pests are insects, mites, nematodes and gastropod molluscs. The damage they do results both from the direct injury they cause to the plants, and from the indirect consequences of the fungal, bacterial or viral infections they transmit.. Ajpolino (talk) 15:38, 13 May 2020 (UTC)

I had a look and decided that I thought it was necessary to mention what types of pests attacked plants before mentioning what kind of damage they did. So I left it for CC's consideration, but seem to have marked it "done" inadvertently. I have now made some limited alterations. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 18:04, 13 May 2020 (UTC)

Fair enough, your changes look fine to me, but if you strongly prefer the old version, I certainly won't complain. Thanks for the quick reply. Ajpolino (talk) 18:59, 13 May 2020 (UTC)

• Concept - living organism - unnecessarily redundant.

Done. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 05:42, 13 May 2020 (UTC)

• Concept - which is invasive or troublesome to plants or animals, human or human concerns, livestock, or human structures. - I'm not entirely sold on this list. Starting with "plants or animals" seems unintentionally broad. Obviously, humans are invasive and troublesome to plants and animals...

Done. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 05:42, 13 May 2020 (UTC)

• Concepts>Animals as pests - I always find sentences constructed as [Sublist A, B, or C] or [Additional list item] to be confusing to read (I'm looking now at when they damage crops, forestry, or buildings or injure people.). Flipping them (in this case "injure people or damage crops, forestry, or buildings") makes it easier for me to pick up.

Done. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 05:42, 13 May 2020 (UTC)

• Economic impact>In agriculture and horticulture - feeding on roots, of tunnel into the stem or under the bark is "or tunneling" intended?

Done. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 05:42, 13 May 2020 (UTC)

• Same section - the gall mites which affect a wide range of plants, several species being major pests causing substantial economic damage to crops. At first read I thought "several species" referred to "plants" rather than "gall mites".

Done. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 05:42, 13 May 2020 (UTC)

• Ecology>It seems a stretch to point readers interested in pest ecology to Logistic_function#In_ecology:_modeling_population_growth for "Further information".

Removed. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 06:17, 13 May 2020 (UTC)

• Mythology, religion, folklore and culture - for the Tryphon of Constantinople paragraph, is there any additional context you can add? The paragraph seems somewhat arbitrary now.

Added another example, and led in to the topic. Chiswick Chap (talk) 07:17, 13 May 2020 (UTC)

2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.

a (reference section): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR): d (copyvio and plagiarism):

• Concept - It's a bit weird that readers interested in the concept of what is and isn't a pest will be pointed to reference #1, a FAQ document from Brunei's Ministry of Primary Resources and Tourism that is primarily a list of images of local pests of plants and their symptoms. If you've seen any references that discuss the concept of pests in more detail, perhaps that would be a better source here.

Replaced. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 06:32, 13 May 2020 (UTC)

• Could you expand the reference for the current #4? If the URL dies no one will know which PestAware article you were referring to. Just adding a title should suffice.

Done. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 06:17, 13 May 2020 (UTC)

• Was this reference originally in some publication? If so, could you fill out the ref (currently #9)?

Done. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 06:17, 13 May 2020 (UTC)

• The Encyclopedia of Pest Management ref (currently #16) gives me a dead URL and the DOI leads to a "page not found". Is this something you can fix, or is something wrong on their end?

Done. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 06:17, 13 May 2020 (UTC)

3. It is broad in its coverage.

a (major aspects): b (focused):

• Could you expand Pest_(organism)#Pest_control_in_buildings just a bit? Seems the topic should merit more than a sentence in an article on pests.

Extended coverage. Chiswick Chap (talk) 07:33, 13 May 2020 (UTC)

4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.

Fair representation without bias:

5. It is stable.

No edit wars, etc.:

6. It is illustrated by images and other media, where possible and appropriate.

a (images are tagged and non-free content have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):

• Images look good, and license tags look appropriate.

Noted.

Overall:

Pass/Fail: