Talk:Marsh shrew/GA1
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
GA Review
GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch
Reviewer: IJReid (talk · contribs) 03:14, 12 February 2015 (UTC)
I will take this, to get back into reviewing. A first look gives this article an okay review, but there are important things to be considered. The lead needs to be expanded, and all info in the lead should be in the article; the animal should be referred to as the marsh shrew throughout the entire article; there should be no need for a reference in the infobox title. Other than these, the article checks out as good, but a more thorough review will be completed after these are fixed. IJReid discuss 03:14, 12 February 2015 (UTC)
- Thank you for the review. I think I have addressed the above concerns but will read over once or twice more later today. Please give this as thorough a review as possible. Any recommendations are appreciated. I am going to redo the map in the next few days, to show more clearly where the 3 subpopulations reside. The data is in the .pdf by Pattie. --Gaff (talk) 16:34, 12 February 2015 (UTC)
- In a figure caption of the original description it is still referred to as Bendire's shrew.
- "There are no sympatric..." > "There are no sympatric Sorex species residing within the range of the marsh shrew." This removes the redundancies and adds a little more info. IJReid discuss 00:38, 13 February 2015 (UTC)
- There are some minor textual errors in the Taxonomy section, which talks more about naming and less about taxonomy.
- The taxonomy section could be renamed "Taxonomy and naming". IJReid discuss 00:43, 13 February 2015 (UTC)
- The first two sentences of behaviour and ecology could be merged, with both references at the end unless there is a difference in the common selection of these items to eat. IJReid discuss 00:47, 13 February 2015 (UTC)
- The above problem is also in the second paragraph.
- This article is a little short on references, so I will check the info. If you do not have already, I can send you a copy of the Pattie article available in JSTOR.
- Not needed, but if possible, better and more images could be found and used. IJReid discuss 05:14, 13 February 2015 (UTC)
- Reproduction info could be added from the IUCN source.
- http://www.nsrl.ttu.edu/personnel/RJBaker/Publications/334-Mitochondrial%20DNA%20variation-O'Neill%20et%20al-2005.pdf could be used for current taxonomy. IJReid discuss 14:44, 13 February 2015 (UTC)
- http://and.lternet.edu/lter/pubs/pdf/pub1229.pdf for habitat. IJReid discuss 14:47, 13 February 2015 (UTC)
- http://www.jstor.org/stable/1381337?seq=1#page_scan_tab_contents for historic classification. IJReid discuss 14:52, 13 February 2015 (UTC)
- http://www.cabdirect.org/abstracts/19800575730.html;jsessionid=6D41EFA4DE4B6CB94D6C4AAAB9E20BF1 for parasites. IJReid discuss 14:55, 13 February 2015 (UTC)
- I don't have access to this last paper, but found a 2007 paper by the same author, which is accessible and appears to have same info http://digitalcommons.unl.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1001&context=parasitologyfacpubs --Gaff (talk) 15:48, 13 February 2015 (UTC)