Talk:Roystonea regia

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Jimfbleak - talk to me? 21:01, 22 January 2010 (UTC)

Comments to follow in next few days

• Ref 26 link appears to be dead
  • fixed
• refs 2,5, 11 binomial is not italicised, 5 and 11 also lack a publisher
  • fixed
• File:AVE PALMAS1.JPG uploader appears to be different from photographer, not clear why this is GFDL
  • removed
• Image captions repeat article title contra MoS
  • Wasn't aware of this. Fixed, I think
• text looks OK on first read, but lead is a bit short - doesn't mention reproduction or religious significance which have whole sections
  • Added a little, will add some more.

• OK, let me know when you are done Jimfbleak - talk to me? 17:25, 24 January 2010 (UTC)

• OK, I looked at it some more, and I think the only major thing missing was the fact that Cuban and Floridian populations were long considered separate species. I think that's worth including in the lead, since the older designation remains in many sources. Guettarda (talk) 21:15, 6 February 2010 (UTC)

• What does "not reported" in the common names mean?
  • The source doesn't report where the name is used. Can you think of a better way to phrase it? Or should I scrap the table?

• I think the main problem with the table is that it's a mixture of alternative English names (good) and names for the plant in other languages (not so good - Wikipedia is not a multilingual dictionary) I'd be inclined to chop the Spanish, Urdu and Hindi and retitle the section and the table as "Alternative English names". Common is misleading - although you presumably mean non-scientific, many readers will assume that it means commonly used, but since we don't even know where some of the names are used, that's confusing Jimfbleak - talk to me? 17:25, 24 January 2010 (UTC)

• Trimmed to 'used in cultivation", "used in the US", "used in Cuba" (which is fair, I think, for a species that has that much specific importance in Cuba) and "used in India", since I can't determine, from the sources, whether this should be considered usage "in English" or not, but given the fact that there are probably more English speakers in India than any other country except the US, I don't feel like I have enough information to make the call. Guettarda (talk) 21:02, 6 February 2010 (UTC)

• Underwood's Bonneted Bat (Eumops underwoodi) seems to be the only US member of the genus, Is the Florida species a new split?
  • Apparently it's a split from Eumops glaucinus,[1] and is only found in extreme south of Florida (and if it's a valid species, it's critically endangered).

I made these changes. Ok, let's do it

GA review

(see here for criteria)

1. It is reasonably well written.

   a (prose): b (MoS):

2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.

   a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):

3. It is broad in its coverage.

   a (major aspects): b (focused):

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, where possible and appropriate.

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

7. Overall:

   Pass/Fail:

Additions

The following material was added recently, but remains uncited.

The lowest leaf persists for one-two months before turning yellow and drying at which stage the leaf sheath separates from the crownshaft and detaches smoothly, leaving a pale yellow circular scar on the trunk that darkens with age. Fast growing specimens usually shed one leaf a month and can reach 50-60 feet of height in ten years if growing conditions are optimum.

Please add a citation from a reliable source if you add this back to the article. Guettarda (talk) 20:28, 20 April 2010 (UTC)