Wikipedia

Wikipedia:Featured article review/Olm/archive1

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

The article was delisted by Nikkimaria via FACBot (talk) 4:15, 28 October 2023 (UTC) [1].

Olm

edit
Notified: Yerpo, BORIS BL~enwiki, Leo Breman, RN1970, Susmuffin, Sheep81, Tone, WP Amphibians and Reptiles, WP Bosnia and Herzegovina, WP Slovenia, WP Croatia, noticed in May 2023

Review section

edit

This older featured article contains extensive uncited text in the conservation section and also needs a review for out of date content. For instance, the article references "the most recent assessment in 2008" when a 2022 assessment has since been released, and the range map has significant differences from the most recent map provided by IUCN. Also possible sourcing issues such as "After joining the European Union in 2004, Slovenia had to establish mechanisms for protection of the species included in the EU Habitats Directive." being cited to a document from 2002. Hog Farm Talk 02:14, 3 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

An IP has added more content to the article, but not all of it is sourced. Diannaa has removed some of it as a copyright violation, although other added content by the IP such as the unsourced bit beginning with "»At the EU level, Olm the blind cave salamander" send off vibes of being copy and pasted from somewhere to me, with the chevrons and other unusual formatting in there (like the unintentional line break). Hog Farm Talk 13:25, 4 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I agree it all looks sketchy. It should likely come out, just in case. — Diannaa (talk) 13:30, 4 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Comment: I improved referencing and updated the assessment. The map is now equipped with a note until a more precise map can be drawn by someone who knows how to do it (the marked area still shows the maximum extent of the olm's native range). The recently added text by an IP editor was largely just repeating what was already stated, and was mostly removed. This could have been the olm researcher Dr Boris Bulog who already collaborated with me on writing the originally expanded article. He may have copied some of his existing work, which would explain odd markup; I'll try to sort it out if he contacts me again, and see if there's anything useful. — Yerpo Eh? 09:23, 19 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

FARC section

edit
Issues raised in the review section include sourcing and currency. Nikkimaria (talk) 22:09, 18 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment: the uncited statements have been mostly resolved. However, the "Conservation" section is very disorganised and there are some MOS:TODAY issues. I am unsure of the quality of the sources because I am not an expert in this area, so I will not comment on if the new sources are valid. Z1720 (talk) 00:54, 16 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delist; the prose is not at FA standard. I took a look at the Conservation section based on Z1720's comment, and agree it is all over the map, but I also noticed there the substandard prose. The first two sentences use repetitive prose (extremely vulnerable, extremely sensitive). "The contamination of the karst underground waters is due to the large number of waste disposal sites leached by rainwater, as well as to the accidental overflow of various liquids." Various is an overused and little useful word; perhaps something more useful like polluting? "The reflection of such pollution in the karst underground waters depends on the type and quantity of pollutants, " ... basically says that pollution depends on pollutants, not very helpful, and generally always true. " but they are quite different from those in surface waters." Quite different is different. "All of these substances persist in the environment, being slowly, if at all, degraded by natural processes. In addition, all are toxic to life if they accumulate in any appreciable quantity." --> These substances persist in the environment, and are degraded slowly, if at all, by natural processes; they are toxic when accumulated in appreciable quantities." Clean up "The olm is nevertheless noted for its capability of surviving higer (SIC) concentrations of accumulated PCBs than related aquatic organisms." ... to ... "Nonetheless, the olm can survive higher concentrations of accumulated PCBs than related aquatic organisms." "Areas inhabited by the olm were eventually included " "At present they can only be experienced" ... since when? Continuing to the next section: "The enthusiasm of scientists and the broader public about this inhabitant of Slovenian caves is still strong 300 years after its discovery." --> Scientific and public enthusiasm surrounds the Olm 300 years after its discovery. And so it goes throughout; it will be difficult for this article to come to FA standard unless an experienced biology FA writer engages. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 19:21, 17 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delist per Sandy. Hog Farm Talk 13:13, 27 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Closing note: This removal candidate has been delisted, but there may be a delay in bot processing of the close. Please leave the {{featured article review}} template in place on the talk page until the bot goes through. Nikkimaria (talk) 04:15, 28 October 2023 (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_review/Olm/archive1&oldid=1182296660"