Wikipedia

Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Dryomyza anilis/archive2

< Wikipedia:Featured article candidates
The following is an archived discussion of a featured article nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured article candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.

The article was archived by Ian Rose via FACBot (talk) 8 February 2020 [1].

Dryomyza anilis

edit
Nominator(s): AnuBalasubramanian (talk) 20:52, 27 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

This article is about the fly Dryomyza anilis, with a significant portion of the page focusing on mating behavior. I underwent a rigorous round of edits to improve the page to GA status, and believe that it is a realistic candidate for FA status. I am absolutely open to hearing any and all feedback to improve the page. I also believe I have successfully incorporated edits from my first FA nomination for this page (I incorrectly nominated the page for FA before going through the GA process). AnuBalasubramanian (talk) 20:52, 27 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Coord note -- Hi, just to be clear, there's no requirement to go through GAN before FAC, but getting as many eyes on an article as possible before FAC, whether through GAN, Peer Review, or just asking people, is certainly useful. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 21:46, 27 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Comments of Fowler&fowler

edit

Hello AnuBalasubramanian: I can help you with the lead, which seems short for the article's size. I will get around to that in a day or two, but I couldn't help noticing the language, which seems a tad too technical. Would you consider wiki-linking some of the unfamiliar words so that someone like me, a rank beginner, can take a stab at summarizing the text into the descriptive prose appropriate for the lead? Fowler&fowler«Talk» 16:49, 29 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Comments from JM

edit

Just looking at the reference list...

  • BugGuide probably isn't reliable, as far as FAC goes. It's hosted by a university, but here's the disclaimer: "Dedicated naturalists volunteer their time and resources here to provide this service. We strive to provide accurate information, but we are mostly just amateurs attempting to make sense of a diverse natural world."
  • Same for NatureSpot. It looks like a great little local conservation charity, but it's not at the level of the sort of sources we'd be looking for here - unless you think I'm wrong about that?
  • "Otronen, null"?
  • Your Hocking reference is incomplete.
  • I couldn't see anything supporting the claim "As the fly matures, its cephalopharyngeal skeleton also modifies with time to maximize the fly's ability to take in nutrients." on the "Diptera – an overview" source, but I didn't look that closely. The reason I was looking is that the page is just providing extracts from Elsevier books/journals related to the Diptera. Perhaps it would be better to cite the books/articles/chapters/whatever in question directly?
  • Are your date formats consistent?
  • Are you consistent in your use of capitals? You seem to change between title case and sentence case for article titles. Also check your italics in article titles. And the way you refer to authors (Milburn, J. vs. Milburn, Josh - etc.). Things just look a little untidy right now - fine for GAC, but something that needs sorted for FAC.
  • Is this worth citing?

Sorry - I know these comments are frightfully dull, but this is the sort of thing that needs to be gotten right at FAC. I have to oppose until these things are sorted, but I'd be happy to withdraw my oppose and take a look at the rest of the article once the sourcing issues are resolved. Josh Milburn (talk) 21:34, 29 January 2020 (UTC) For the record, I'm taking part in the WikiCup. Josh Milburn (talk) 21:34, 29 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Image review

edit
  • Consider adding alt text.
  • There is no need to add a caption to the infobox image, as that just results in "Dryomyza anilis" appearing both above and below the image.
  • "File:Dryomyza (=Neuroctena) anilis - male (22900404455).jpg": "dog poo" in the description is not very encyclopedic; and may not travel well for non-BritEng speakers.
  • I there a reason why "File:Dryomyza anilis 05.JPG" is set smaller than the other images. I note that it uses px to size; this is depreciated, could you use upright?
  • Caption "Face of Dryomyza anilis, depicting the fly's large red eyes". Being picky about your choice of words, the picture depicts the face, as you say; possibly '; note the large red eyes' or similar?
  • Caption "Wing markings of Dryomyza anilis. Similar.
  • The "source" does not link to the image; replace it with the link against "Description".

The above notwithstanding, impressive work on the images for a first FAC.

Gog the Mild (talk) 21:11, 3 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Dunkleosteus77

edit

Coord note (2)

edit

Hi, it's been well over a week since the first comments and no response from the nominator, plus I think the sourcing concerns Josh raises are probably best sorted outside the pressures of FAC, so I'm going to archive this. Aside from the suggestions above, I'd again recommend, per Brian and Laser brain at the previous FAC, considering a mentor for a future nomination. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 11:52, 8 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Featured_article_candidates/Dryomyza_anilis/archive2&oldid=939741458"