Wikipedia

Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Frog/archive1

< Wikipedia:Featured article candidates‎ | Frog
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 promoted by Ian Rose 04:31, 26 October 2012 [1].

Frog

edit

Frog (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Toolbox
Nominator(s): Cwmhiraeth (talk · contribs) and Thompsma (talk · contribs)

I am nominating this for featured article because I have been working on it for four months and it has had a thorough peer review done by Thompsma and I believe (hope) it meets the required standard. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 14:39, 25 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I suspect the reason is that this frog was first described in January 2012 and since then, nobody has updated the article Frog. I have added it now. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 18:13, 28 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Image review: All images appear to be properly licenced with no copyright issues. LittleJerry (talk) 23:12, 1 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Overall, I support. However I think cite 1 will need an accessdate. LittleJerry (talk) 23:16, 1 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you. I have improved citation 1. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 06:03, 2 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • I made these changes, adding links or moving link to first occurrence mainly.
  • I changed biomass to body mass since the former is both more technical and potentially ambiguous - see biomass
  • The dup links detector came up clear, but I did wonder if some of the semi-technical terms might have benefited from a link, or an earlier link. For example, I find it surprising that metamorphosis isn't linked in the lead or at its first occurrence in the body of the text. Perhaps you could see if any further links could be helpful Jimfbleak - talk to me? 07:04, 5 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you both. I will work on your wikilinks suggestion Jim and have responded to a query left some time ago on the article talk page by Sir Shurf. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 08:23, 5 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: Absolutely great work, as others have said. Only a grammatical point from me:

Done. Thank you for your comments. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 05:10, 7 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by Sasata (talk) 23:50, 7 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

  • lead
  • possibly useful links: species diversity, glandular, taxonomy, keystone, vocalizations, behaviours, predators, threatened Done
  • "There are 4,800 recorded species" exactly? Done
  • "Frog warts (or verrucae)" since the word verrucae isn't used again in the lead, how about leaving this jargon until later in the article? Done
  • tweak linking well-camouflaged to well-camouflaged Done
  • "they Metamorphosismetamorphose into"fix link Careless of me
  • "Frogs are extremely efficient at converting what they eat into body mass which makes them an important food source for predators." add comma after mass Done
  • "one third of all frog and salamander species (33.6%)" don't need the exact value in the lead, just use "about" or "approximately" Done
  • Etymology and taxonomy
  • is there prior precedent for the use of Online Etymology Dictionary as a reliable source? I'm happy to change this. Can you suggest a more reliable source?
I don't see a need. It gives its sources on the main page. LittleJerry (talk) 15:53, 8 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • link classified, families Done
  • "a urostyle" a-> an Done. Looks odd to me because the word is pronounced as if it started with a "y".
I changed this back to "a urostyle". The choice between a and an depends on the pronunciation, not the spelling (compare "a university"). Lesgles (talk) 01:42, 14 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • "subcutaneous lymph spaces"; "protractor lentis muscle";"keratinous beaks and denticles" this jargon needs links Done
  • "Future studies of molecular genetics should provide further insights into the evolutionary relationships among anuran families." WP:Crystal violation? Removed

... More soon

Thank you for undertaking this review. I have dealt with all the points mentioned above. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 09:40, 8 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Evolution
  • links: caecilian, divergence, lissamphibian, neobatrachia, Temnospondyli, Carboniferous, Caudata, stem, Texas, common ancestor, tree, family Done
  • "…and that the temnospondyl-origin hypothesis was more credible than other theories." was->is ? I changed this but think that "was" was better.
  • "questioned the choice of calibration points used" should explain what this means Done
  • "from the 250 million year old early" -> 250 million-year-old Done
  • "a forward directed ilium" forward-directed Done
  • "unlike the fused urostyle or coccyx found in" italics not needed Done
  • "The tibia and fibula bones are also separate making it probable that" comma after separate (for a pause) Done
  • "from the early Jurassic (188–213 million years ago)" Jurassic has already been linked, and if you give the dates, it should be on the 1st occurrence Done
  • "evolutionary changes in chromosome numbers" -> chromosome numbers is a better link Done
  • "mammals than in frogs which means that" comma after frogs Done
  • "An early, well preserved fossil" -> well-preserved Done
  • "found in present day species" -> present-day Done
  • should indicate somewhere why Indirana has a question mark in front (perhaps in a footnote?) Removed as it was not supported by the citation. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 05:18, 11 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by Axl

  • From the lead section, paragraph 4: "In 2006, one third of all frog and salamander species that depend on water during some stage of their life cycle were considered to be globally threatened or extinct." Why are salamander species included? Axl ¤ [Talk] 10:36, 11 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    The source used was concerned with amphibians rather than frogs. Frog species number 88% of total amphibian species and the caecilians are basically terrestrial, not requiring water to breed, so I used this figure. I could search for a purely Anuran figure if you think the present figure unsatisfactory. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 12:33, 11 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    Yes, please do. The inclusion of salamanders is confusing, and potentially creates bias in an article about frogs. Axl ¤ [Talk] 16:37, 11 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
All the studies that I can find refer to amphibians rather than just frogs, so I have removed the words "frog and salamander" from the article. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 06:09, 12 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I have reworded this section of the lead. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 08:58, 14 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
With the new text, it is unclear if the figure refers to all amphibians or just frogs. (The preceding sentence refers to "amphibians".) Axl ¤ [Talk] 09:47, 14 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I have clarified this. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 13:03, 14 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you. Which reference is that from? Axl ¤ [Talk] 17:58, 14 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I have added a reference to the lead section. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 05:36, 15 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. Axl ¤ [Talk] 10:43, 15 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • From "Etymology and taxonomy", paragraph 1: "The common features possessed by the "proto-frogs" in the Salientia group include fourteen presacral vertebrae (modern frogs have eight or nine), a long and forward sloping ilium in the pelvis, the presence of a frontal parietal bone and a lower jaw without teeth." This text is referenced to Tree of Life. However the source does not provide this information. Also, the text would be better placed in the "Evolution" section. Axl ¤ [Talk] 10:47, 11 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    This specific information is at the foot of the Tree of Life page. I have moved this part paragraph to the Evolution section. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 12:33, 11 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    My mistake, you are right. Thank you for moving the text. Axl ¤ [Talk] 16:41, 11 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Done Cwmhiraeth (talk) 05:23, 14 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • From "Etymology and taxonomy", last paragraph: "Some species of anurans hybridize readily. For instance, the edible frog (Rana esculenta) is a hybrid between the pool frog (R. lessonae) and the marsh frog (R. ridibunda)." The reference is from 1999. I wonder if the genus name Rana is outdated, with the new name Pelophylax? Axl ¤ [Talk] 19:46, 11 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Done. The scientific names have changed in AmphibiaWeb since I used and referenced this source 4 months ago. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 06:09, 12 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • From "Evolution", paragraph 2: "Its skull is frog-like, being broad with large eye sockets, but the fossil has features diverging from modern frogs. These include a longer body with more vertebrae and a forward-directed ilium in the pelvis." Isn't a forward-sloping ilium a feature of modern frogs? Axl ¤ [Talk] 20:04, 11 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Done Cwmhiraeth (talk) 06:09, 12 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • From "Morphology and physiology", paragraph 1: "Because the oxygen is dissolved in an aqueous film on the skin and passes from there to the blood, the skin must remain moist at all times." I am not convinced that's true. Are the lungs inadequate to provide gas exchange for the frog? Axl ¤ [Talk] 20:50, 11 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I have rephrased this. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 06:09, 12 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • From "Morphology and physiology", subsection "Skin", paragraph 3: "The male hairy frog (Trichobatrachus robustus) has dermal papillae projecting from its lower back and thighs giving it a hoary appearance." I'm not sure what "hoary" means in this context. Does it mean silvery-grey? Axl ¤ [Talk] 23:15, 12 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I checked in the dictionary and saw that I had misused the word. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 09:33, 13 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Done Cwmhiraeth (talk) 05:23, 14 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • From "Distribution and conservation status", paragraph 2: "The latter is of particular concern to scientists because it inhabited the pristine Monteverde Cloud Forest Reserve and its disappearance could not be linked directly to human activities." Why does the absence of a link to human activity make this extinction "of particular concern"? Axl ¤ [Talk] 10:47, 14 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I have added an explanation and extra reference. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 13:03, 14 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • From "Distribution and conservation status", paragraph 2: "Increased mortality from birds may actually increase the likelihood of parasitism." Should this be "Increased bird mortality"? Axl ¤ [Talk] 18:03, 14 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Clarified Cwmhiraeth (talk) 05:36, 15 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • From "Distribution and conservation status", paragraph 5: "A Canadian study conducted in 2006 suggested that heavy traffic in their environment was a larger threat to frog populations than was habitat loss." Perhaps move this sentence to the latter part of paragraph 2? Axl ¤ [Talk] 21:18, 14 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Done Cwmhiraeth (talk) 05:36, 15 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for moving the sentence. However you did not change the referencing for the preceding sentence in paragraph 2. Can you please confirm the reference for that sentence? Axl ¤ [Talk] 09:47, 15 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I have added a new reference Cwmhiraeth (talk) 18:47, 15 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • From "Morphology and physiology", subsection "Digestion and excretion", paragraph 1: "The tongue normally lies coiled in the mouth, free at the back and attached to the mandibles at the front." Should this be "mandible" (singular)? Axl ¤ [Talk] 21:45, 14 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Done Cwmhiraeth (talk) 05:36, 15 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • From "Morphology and physiology", subsection "Reproductive system", paragraph 1: "The ovaries of the female frog are beside the kidneys and the eggs pass down a pair of oviducts to the exterior." Do the eggs pass through the cloaca? Axl ¤ [Talk] 22:35, 14 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Done Cwmhiraeth (talk) 05:36, 15 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • From "Morphology and physiology", subsection "Nervous system": "Frogs have ten cranial nerves which pass information from the outside directly to the brain." Should this be ten pairs of cranial nerves? Axl ¤ [Talk] 11:53, 15 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Corrected Cwmhiraeth (talk) 18:47, 15 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • From "Morphology and physiology", subsection "Torpor", paragraph 2: "The researchers wondered why such a mechanism is not more widely used in the animal kingdom. They concluded that it would only be useful to an animal that remains completely unconscious for an extended period of time...." I don't think that this extended speculation is required. Perhaps just delete the first sentence, and change the second to "This is only useful to animals that remain completely unconscious for an extended period of time...." Or even delete both sentences completely. Axl ¤ [Talk] 19:41, 15 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Done Cwmhiraeth (talk) 09:13, 16 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • From "Morphology and physiology", subsection "Torpor", paragraph 2: "Other research showed that, to provide these limited energy requirements, muscles became atrophied but that the hind limb muscles were preferentially unaffected." Perhaps change this to be more definitive: "To provide these energy requirements, muscles atrophy, but hind limb muscles are preferentially unaffected." Axl ¤ [Talk] 21:31, 15 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Done Cwmhiraeth (talk) 09:13, 16 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • From "Locomotion", subsection "Jumping", paragraph 1: "The Australian rocket frog, Litoria nasuta, can leap over 50 times its body length of 5.5 centimetres (2.2 in), resulting in jumps of over 2 metres (6 ft 7 in)." Please re-phrase this to give the absolute distance (2 metres) first, followed by the relative distance. Axl ¤ [Talk] 21:35, 15 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Done Cwmhiraeth (talk) 09:13, 16 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • From "Locomotion", subsection "Jumping", paragraph 1: "The acceleration of the jump may be up to twice the acceleration under gravity." I'm not sure that most readers would understand what this means. A full explanation is beyond the scope of this article. Either quantify the acceleration (19.6 ms-2 ?) or delete the sentence completely. Axl ¤ [Talk] 21:39, 15 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Done Cwmhiraeth (talk) 09:13, 16 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • In "Locomotion", subsection "Jumping", I wonder if paragraphs 2 & 3 would be better placed in "Morphology and physiology", subsection "Feet and legs", but I don't have a strong opinion about this. Axl ¤ [Talk] 09:44, 16 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I have moved one and a half paragraphs. Looks good to me. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 13:03, 16 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Okay, thanks. Axl ¤ [Talk] 17:08, 16 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • From "Locomotion", subsection "Swimming": "Frogs are at their most vulnerable to predators when they are undergoing metamorphosis. At this time the tail is being lost and locomotion by means of limbs is only just becoming established." I'm not sure why this is in the "Swimming" subsection. Perhaps move it to "Defence"? Axl ¤ [Talk] 09:10, 17 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I have moved the sentence to the "Metamorphosis" section. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 10:30, 17 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Okay, thanks. Axl ¤ [Talk] 11:51, 17 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • From "Locomotion", subsection "Climbing": "The forces involved include surface tension and viscosity, but mostly involve boundary friction of the toe pad epidermis on the surface." Can you re-order the sentence to state the main effect (boundary friction) first please? Axl ¤ [Talk] 19:52, 20 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Done. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 21:00, 20 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • From "Natural history", subsection "Reproduction", paragraph 2: "Among prolonged breeders, males usually arrive at the breeding site first and remain there for some time whereas females tend to arrive later and depart after they have spawned." How about "... and depart soon after they have spawned." Axl ¤ [Talk] 22:19, 20 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Done. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 08:26, 21 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • From "Natural history", subsection "Reproduction", paragraph 3: "In some years, suitable conditions may not occur and the frogs may go for one or more years without breeding." Should this be "two or more years"? Axl ¤ [Talk] 22:41, 20 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Done. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 08:26, 21 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • From "Natural history", subsection "Life cycle", subsection "Eggs", paragraph 1: "Frog's eggs are typically surrounded by several layers of gelatinous material and are known as frogspawn." Oddly, the word "frogspawn" redirects to "Euphyllia divisa". Also, isn't the "egg" both the internal black bit and the external clear jelly? Isn't the word "frogspawn" defined as a clump of multiple eggs? Axl ¤ [Talk] 12:48, 21 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Done, and "frogspawn" no longer redirects to the coral of the same name.. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 13:38, 21 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Done. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 18:07, 21 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • From "Natural history", subsection "Life cycle", subsection "Eggs", paragraph 2: "The smoky jungle frog (Leptodactylus pentadactylus) makes a foam nest in a hollow with about a thousand eggs which hatch when they get flooded, or even complete their development in the nest." This awkward sentence needs to be re-phrased, perhaps split into two. Axl ¤ [Talk] 20:13, 21 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Done. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 20:26, 21 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • From "Natural history", subsection "Life cycle", subsection "Eggs", paragraph 2: "Aquatic eggs normally hatch within one week when the capsule splits as a result of hormones released by the developing larvae." Are they really hormones? Or enzymes? Axl ¤ [Talk] 20:16, 21 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
My error. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 20:26, 21 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • From "Natural history", subsection "Life cycle", subsection "Tadpoles", paragraph 1: "At least one species (Nannophrys ceylonensis) has tadpoles that are semi-terrestrial and live among wet rocks,[115][116] but as a general rule, free living larvae are fully aquatic." Please re-arrange the sentence to state the general rule first. Axl ¤ [Talk] 22:12, 21 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Done. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 06:20, 22 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • From "Natural history", subsection "Life cycle", subsection "Metamorphosis": "The nervous system becomes adapted for stereoscopic vision and hearing." Do frogs really have stereoscopic vision? Axl ¤ [Talk] 00:44, 22 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Apparently this is so. I have added some extra references to this section. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 06:20, 22 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, you are right. Actually I found a good reference here that could be used to add information to the "Sight" subsection. Axl ¤ [Talk] 10:31, 22 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I have used your source in the Sight section. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 12:55, 22 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • From "Natural history", subsection "Parental care", paragraph 2: "When they hatch, the female moves them on her back to a water-holding bromeliad or other similar water body, depositing just one in each location." Does she move the tadpoles? Axl ¤ [Talk] 12:54, 22 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Yes! I have done quite a bit of rephrasing in "Parental care". Cwmhiraeth (talk) 18:08, 22 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • From "Defence", paragraph 2: "In part of its range where both of its two models are present, it mimics the less toxic one." I'm not sure how this is relevant. Perhaps just delete the sentence? Axl ¤ [Talk] 23:00, 22 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I have removed it. Mimicking the less toxic species is a more successful strategy because the predators that feed on the more toxic species don't learn lessons because they are dead! Cwmhiraeth (talk) 05:12, 23 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • From "Defence", last paragraph: "The strategy employed by recently metamorphosed American toads (Bufo americanus) on being approached by a snake was to crouch down and remain immobile." Is "recently metamorphosed" relevant? If not, delete it. Also, present tense would be better. Axl ¤ [Talk] 23:12, 22 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Done Cwmhiraeth (talk) 05:12, 23 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • From "Uses", paragraph 1: "Originally they were supplied locally but overexploitation led to a diminution in the supply and now there is a world trade in frogs." The conjunction "and" implies that there is a connection between the first and second parts of the sentence, but these are only tangentially related. Axl ¤ [Talk] 09:33, 23 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Done Cwmhiraeth (talk) 13:45, 23 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • From "Uses", paragraph 6: "It has long been suspected that pre-Columbian Mesoamericans used the venom of the cane toad (Bufo marinus) as a hallucinogen." I didn't know that some frogs/toads produced venom. This is worth mentioning in the "Digestion and excretion" subsection. Axl ¤ [Talk] 10:43, 23 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I have changed the word "venom" to "toxin". Cwmhiraeth (talk) 13:45, 23 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • From "Uses", last paragraph: "Two other species, the Kokoe poison dart frog (Phyllobates aurotaenia) and the black-legged dart frog (Phyllobates bicolor) are also used for this purpose but are less toxic and need to be heated over a fire to extract the poison." The frogs have to be heated over a fire? Axl ¤ [Talk] 10:50, 23 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
This is roughly what the source states. I have changed the wording in the article. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 13:45, 23 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Okay. Are the frogs alive or dead while they are being heated? Axl ¤ [Talk] 21:41, 23 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I guess they are dead by that time. I have rephrased the statement and referenced it to the primary source which merely states "... are impaled on a special stick entering the mouth and exiting through a hind leg; the spitted frog may sometimes, but not necessarily, be held near fire while darts are rubbed in its skin secretions." Cwmhiraeth (talk) 06:13, 24 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Okay. Axl ¤ [Talk] 08:57, 24 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Comment by Jesse V.

Thank you. I will work have worked through your list and made corrections. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 11:31, 21 October 2012 (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/Frog/archive1&oldid=1144462976"