Wikipedia

Wikipedia:WikiProject Mammals/Collaboration/Past MCs

< Wikipedia:WikiProject Mammals | Collaboration

This page is a historical record of past collaborations, and improvements made to articles, plus listing the current one, as well as unsuccessful nominations.

First incarnation - early 2008

edit

Polar bear (7 votes) was collaboration Feb 15-Mar 14 2008

edit

Nominated 2008-02-01;

Support:

  1. . First choice Kla’quot (talk | contribs) 06:38, 1 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  2. --JayHenry (t) 06:52, 1 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  3. First choice. Marskell (talk) 10:22, 1 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  4. UtherSRG (talk) 12:20, 1 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  5. . Bobisbob (talk) 16:57, 1 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  6. --MONGO 00:08, 2 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  7. Anaxial (talk) 19:12, 3 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Comments:

Progress

edit

Brown Rat (5 votes) was the collaboration Mar 15-Apr 14 2008

edit

Nominated 2008-02-01;

Support:

  1. .Casliber (talk · contribs) 03:25, 1 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  2. Second choice. Marskell (talk) 10:26, 1 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  3. Bobisbob (talk) 17:21, 1 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  4. VanTucky 04:40, 2 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  5. Anaxial (talk) 19:14, 3 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Comments:

Progress

edit

Tiger (6 votes) was the collaboration Apr 15-May 14 2008

edit

Nominated 2008-02-01;

Support:

  1. .Casliber (talk · contribs) 03:25, 1 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  2. --JayHenry (t) 06:52, 1 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  3. --Altaileopard. Looks good. Some more citations in the text would be nice... and I will expand the range a little more.
  4. -- Bobisbob (talk) 16:21, 1 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  5. -- Anaxial (talk) 07:40, 15 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  6. -- Shyamal (talk) 11:40, 16 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Comments:

Progress

edit

Version before collaboration

  • Current status -  

Primate (3 votes) was the collaboration May 15-Jun 14 2008

edit

Nominated 2008-04-14;

Support:

  1. UtherSRG (talk) 03:00, 15 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  2. Cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 03:14, 15 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  3. Jack (talk) 16:03, 24 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Comments:

Progress

edit

Version before collaboration

  • Current status -  

Giraffe (6 votes) is the collaboration March 7th-April 7th 2009

edit

Nominated February 28, 2009;

Support:

  1. --KP Botany (talk) 02:22, 1 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  2. --Rlendog (talk) 03:18, 1 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  3. Shyamal (talk) 06:12, 1 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  4. Anaxial (talk) 08:43, 1 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  5. good choice. Casliber (talk · contribs) 09:43, 1 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  6. Jack (talk) 13:53, 1 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Comments:

  • They're lovely animals, colorful, and large, their fur is gorgeous, and I know little about their taxonomy or evolutionary relationships and would love to learn some more. I recently read an article about one of the subpopulations. --KP Botany (talk) 02:22, 1 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Currently, it is a B-class article so it is a decent starting point to try to achieve GA, and eventually possibly FA, status. On the surface, it does appear to be light on citations, so that can provide an obvious improvement opportunity. Rlendog (talk) 03:20, 1 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Make a start with collaborations. Shyamal (talk) 06:12, 1 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Progress

edit
  • Current status -  

2010

edit

Fossa (animal) (8 votes) May-June 2010

edit

Nominated May 9, 2010; Voting ends on May 16, 2010. Approved. This will be the article to collaborate on for the rest of May till the end of June. Let’s get to work! All discussion should now go on the talk page. The Arbiter★★★ 16:44, 16 May 2010 (UTC) Support:[reply]

  1. Sabine's Sunbird talk 01:53, 9 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  2. Casliber (talk · contribs) 04:46, 9 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  3. UtherSRG (talk) 04:56, 9 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  4. Sasata (talk) 05:28, 9 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  5. – VisionHolder « talk » 12:08, 9 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  6. Ucucha 12:53, 9 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  7. The Arbiter★★★ 22:52, 11 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  8. Shyamal (talk) 03:03, 13 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comments:

I think I've got a new lead sentence: "The fossa (Cryptoprocta ferox) is a mean mammalian predator endemic to Madagascar, and has a unfortunate habit of eating the world's most amazing primates: lemurs." Is that NPOV enough?  :-)
Seriously, though, I could write a section on phylogeny and evolution and offer support for everything else. I could also write an ecology and/or behavior section, though I might leave that to someone else so that no one will think that I'm trying to draw extra attention to the lemur articles I've been working on.  ;-) I'm also willing to write the lead, we already have several highly skilled copyeditors offering support, and since their writing skills are far superior to mine, it may be best if they write it. Either way, just let me know what you want me to work on if it is decided that this will be the article. – VisionHolder « talk » 12:38, 9 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Forget about the lemurs, it eats rodents. Could we ever forgive it? More importantly (if possible), the Mammalian Species account is also available online (here). Ucucha 12:53, 9 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
That heartless beast!  :-) Anyway, nice find on the article. I'm glad you found a free version. Anyway, regardless of whether or not this article is picked, there appears to be one or more naming issues with the article as it stands. I'll start the discussion on the talk page. At the very least, we can at least sort this out, even if a more worthy article is chosen instead. And speaking of other noms, I'm tempted to nominate Malagasy Giant Rat just to see how long it takes Ucucha to change his support. <evil laugh> – VisionHolder « talk » 18:35, 9 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
This thing eats lemurs? *sniff sniff* I vote for AfD, this thing doesn’t deserve an article. ;) The Arbiter★★★ 22:55, 11 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Would be interesting to write about an organism that actually moves. I'm in. Sasata (talk) 05:28, 9 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Wow! Thanks everyone for being willing to start up collaborations again. Hey Sabines Sunbird, this looks like an interesting article. Good work. I would like to know what everyone’s opinion is on how we should close these collaboration votes. Do we do it when it reaches a certain number, or give the voting a time period? What do you guys think? The Arbiter★★★ 22:52, 11 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I think we've got pretty good support for this article, though we could wait a full week from the time this one was nominated to see if others get nominated and supported. As for working on the chosen article, would everyone rather work directly on the article or work from sandboxes, then publish the new article when finished? If we divide it up into sections and work from our own sandboxes, it would reduce edit conflicts. Also, a finished product publication might allow us to put it up on DYK. Finally, is everyone interesting in just re-writing the chosen article and leaving it, or is everyone wanting to work together as a team to take it all the way to FA? – VisionHolder « talk » 00:44, 12 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I see enough info available to take this to FAC, and think we should go for the extra exposure with a DYK. It would require a hefty expansion, but easily doable (in addition to the links above, there's over 100 hits in the ISI Web of Knowledge). I am not sure about the best way to use our collective resources and talents to get this done efficiently as possible, but VH's suggestion sounds like a reasonable way to start. Sasata (talk) 03:38, 12 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
If everyone else agrees on individual sandboxes, we could establish section titles and then divvy them up between willing contributors. As I've said, I have resources to do an "evolutionary history" section, and possibly a "cultural references" section. (I'd have to re-check my book on Malagasy fady, or taboo, when I'm sober...) I don't know who wants want, but I'm willing to compromise. I'm sure we can match the sections to their best potential author. That, of course, will not stop everyone from adding content to each section nor stop them from proofreading / copy-editing. – VisionHolder « talk » 05:07, 12 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I don't think that edit-conflicts are a sufficiently big enough issue to justify editing in chunks in sandboxes. We've run numerous colabs in WP:BIRD without it being a problem. The article at present needs a bit of reorganisation, and this would have to be done first before any such partitioning of effort. I'm not convinced it is needed or useful. Sabine's Sunbird talk 20:41, 13 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Alright, so I’ll close voting after one week. Since we only have one nomination, it doesn’t look like that will be too much of a problem. If we are all going to work on the article, maybe we should have a page to discuss our improvements on. Using the article talk page might leave it cluttered beyond repair, but then again, maybe it won’t. What do you guys think? The Arbiter★★★ 01:21, 14 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Current status -  

Slow loris (6 votes) for late 2010

edit

Nominated May 19, 2010; Approved and ready for collaboration. All discussion should now go to the talk page. Let's get another FA guys! Cheers, The Arbiter★★★ 16:57, 4 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Support:

  1. – VisionHolder « talk » 14:29, 19 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  2. UtherSRG (talk) 15:13, 19 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  3. Jack (talk) 19:45, 19 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  4. The Arbiter★★★ 17:58, 28 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  5. Sasata (talk) 15:59, 1 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  6. Casliber (talk · contribs) 05:00, 4 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comments:

  • Sorry to stick with the strepsirrhine primates, but this article has been in the top 25 most popular primate pages for a long time, and I only recently discovered that it was likely due to a number of "cute slow loris pet videos" on youtube. For conservation reasons, I feel this genus article needs a significant overhaul. We need to show what's known about these primates and explain the conservation status of its three species. Since it's a article on a genus, it can be more broad, hitting some of the highlights of the individual species, as well as shared traits and behaviors. – VisionHolder « talk » 14:29, 19 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Sounds good. This looks like a very interesting article. The Arbiter★★★ 17:58, 28 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I think the chance of this getting promoted is much higher than monkey, would be a good start after a period of inactivity until folks find there feet. Casliber (talk · contribs) 05:00, 4 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]


Past unsuccessful nominations

edit

Woolly Mammoth (5 votes)

edit

Nominated 2008-02-01;

Support:

  1. . Casliber (talk · contribs) 03:25, 1 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  2. --JayHenry (t) 06:52, 1 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  3. Bobisbob (talk) 22:42, 1 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  4. Anaxial (talk) 19:16, 3 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  5. Enoktalk 15:38, 26 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Comments:

Primate (4 votes)

edit

Nominated 2008-02-01;

Support:

  1. UtherSRG (talk) 12:23, 1 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  2. Bobisbob (talk) 17:14, 1 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  3. cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 22:31, 1 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  4. Anaxial (talk) 19:16, 3 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Comments:

Mammal (3 votes)

edit

Nominated 2008-02-01;

Support:

  1. .Casliber (talk · contribs) 03:25, 1 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  2. VanTucky 04:39, 2 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  3. Second choice. Kla’quot (talk | contribs) 10:14, 2 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Comments:

Walrus (3 votes)

edit

Nominated 2008-02-01;

Support:

  1. . Third choice Kla’quot (talk | contribs) 07:20, 1 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  2. . Bobisbob (talk) 16:56, 1 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  3. I HAS A BUCKET! JayHenry (talk) 06:48, 4 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Comments:

Yak (3 votes)

edit

Nominated 2008-02-01;

Support:

  1. An important animal with a poor article. The article covers both domestic and wild yaks, and the wild species is currently Vulnerable. Considering that it is of more import to Asia, improving this would also go a long way towards countering a Western systemic bias. VanTucky 20:50, 3 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  2. Enoktalk 15:35, 11 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  3. Bobisbob (talk) 15:43, 17 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]


Comments:

California Sea Lion (2 votes)

edit

Nominated 2008-02-01;

Support:

  1. What do you think? Bobisbob (talk) 03:36, 1 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  2. .Casliber (talk · contribs) 03:50, 1 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Comments:

Smilodon (2 vote)

edit

Nominated 2008-02-01;

Support:

  1. . Bobisbob (talk) 22:45, 1 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  2. JayHenry (talk) 06:48, 4 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Comments:

Brown Bear (1 vote)

edit

Nominated 2008-02-01;

Support:

  1. .Casliber (talk · contribs) 03:25, 1 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Comments:

Monkey (1 vote)

edit

Nominated 2008-02-01;

Support:

  1. UtherSRG (talk) 12:23, 1 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Comments:

Thompson's gazelle (1 vote)

edit

Nominated 2008-02-01;

Support:

  1. Bobisbob (talk) 16:54, 10 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Comments:

  1. Pros: Looks in good shape to me. I think it needs a little more info. Bobisbob (talk) 18:42, 10 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]


Plains Zebra (1 vote)

edit

Nominated 2008-02-01;

Support:

  1. Bobisbob (talk) 22:53, 1 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Comments:

  1. Anybody wannna add? Bobisbob (talk) 22:53, 1 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]


Spotted Hyena (1 vote)

edit

Nominated February 4, 2008;

Support:

  1. cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 23:45, 4 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Comments:


Dugong (1 vote)

edit

Nominated February 11, 2008;

Support:

  1. Enoktalk 15:31, 11 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Comments:

  • Pros: Significant & fascinating species currently vulnerable to extinction. Already has many quality citations, although the final few sections could still use work. Enoktalk 15:31, 11 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]


African buffalo (1 vote)

edit
  1. Bobisbob (talk) 15:42, 17 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Pinniped (1 vote)

edit
  1. Bobisbob (talk) 01:51, 28 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]


Marsupial (1 vote)

edit

Nominated April 16, 2008;

Support:

  1. StroboX (talk) 13:44, 16 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Comments:

Possum

edit

Nominated May 18, 2010;

Support:

  1. UtherSRG (talk) 12:30, 18 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  2. – VisionHolder « talk » 14:51, 19 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  3. ZooPro 01:03, 28 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comments:

  • It's had an expert tag on it for some time. It's an Australian high-order taxa. It's in desperate need of attention as there are quite a number of diverse species in the taxa. Many N. Americans think there is only one possum, the Virginia Opossum, but that species isn't even in this taxa. Lots of good possibilities for improvement and education. - UtherSRG (talk) 12:30, 18 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hispaniolan Solenodon‎

edit

Nominated May 31, 2010;

Support:

  1. – VisionHolder « talk » 14:58, 31 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comments:

Hispaniolan Hutia‎

edit

Nominated May 31, 2010;

Support:

  1. – VisionHolder « talk » 14:58, 31 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comments:

California sea lion

edit

Nominated June 8, 2010;

Support:

  1. – 24.180.173.157 (talk) 02:14, 9 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comments:

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiProject_Mammals/Collaboration/Past_MCs&oldid=1138361625"