Talk:Southern stingray
| This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Southern stingray article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
| Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
 | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||
| |||||||||||
 | This article uses text donated by Wildscreen from their ARKive project (see below). For further information, please see Wikipedia:GLAM/ARKive. |
 | The content of this article has been derived in whole or part from Wildscreen ARKive texts. Permission has been received from the copyright holder to release this material under both the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported license and the GNU Free Documentation License. You may use either or both licenses. Evidence of this has been confirmed and stored by VRT volunteers, under ticket number 2011090810014488. This template is used by approved volunteers dealing with the Wikimedia volunteer response team system (VRTS) after receipt of a clear statement of permission at permissions-en  wikimedia.org. Do not use this template to claim permission. |
 | This article was the subject of an educational assignment. |
New Edit Entry
Hello! I am a student of Behavioral Ecology (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Education_Program:Washington_University_in_St._Louis/Behavioral_Ecology_%28Fall_2013%29) and one of our assignments was to add to a fish species article. I really enjoyed reading what you have so far. I did make some additions (and a few deletions) to your article though. You have a great start to it! The only part I thought needed more expansion was the behavior section of the article. I only adjusted the behavior section, and incorporated your information with what I added. Gseehra123 (talk) 04:57, 25 October 2013 (UTC)
Great work! I only made a few minor grammatical changes such as the addition of commas where needed and the removal of quotation marks when redundant. One thing I noticed, however, is that you placed all of the citations for a section at the end of that section. This is not typical of the Wikipedia style. I suggest citing directly after the presentation of a statement or fact that was found in another source so that readers can check that fact and the reliability of the source more easily. I also saw that the behavioral sections often mentioned that items were "previously mentioned." Although repetition is not appreciated by readers of the complete article, it might be beneficial for those who are using the headers to seek fast facts. I also added the class banner to the Talk page so that other readers/editors know that this page is the topic of an educational assignment. Awesome job overall! Keep up the good work. Claire.Edelman (talk) 18:35, 31 October 2013 (UTC)
Your page is well organized. That being said, your section on predation and foraging seems a bit lacking. “Foraging and Food” seems a little unnecessary so I changed it to just “Foraging”. The mention about prey in the “Roles within their Ecosystem” seems a little redundant. I changed the formatting around and took out a few unnecessary parts. Great job defining ovoviviparous in your article instead of making the reader go to another page just for the definition. You use the term “there is” repeated in your sexual maturity section, so I changed your transitions a little to smooth it out. I also simplified your heading in Communication between Dasyatis American to simply communication. We know what communication is being said here. The species name is unnecessary and just taking space. Liu.Alexander (talk) 19:00, 31 October 2013 (UTC)
Wiki article is well done. Very easy to read. I changed General behavior to Behavior because it is the heading that encompasses all the behaviors that the species does. General is unnecessary. I have also swapped the 2 paragraphs under reproduction to give it a better flow. It seemed a little awkward to start off with a study done on reproduction and then follow it with a general description of how it reproduces. It would be much better for the readers if the citation were right after the sentences rather than at the end of the sections in order to not leave us in confusion as to where you found the information so that it is easier to track down the articles or websites the information was pulled from.Junsu.shinn (talk)
Hey Gurpreet! Good additions. A few general comments: first you use the full species name throughout the article and I think it can be a little awkward. Consider using the less formal souther stingray here and there to vary references to the organism. Additionally, you added a lot of citations to the end of paragraphs which is fine, though I think if you have time, it would be better for the page if you could distribute them to the ends of the sentences they refer to. Otherwise, I removed a few explanations of terms where I think a link to the wiki article will suffice. Andrewkamel (talk) 03:06, 1 November 2013 (UTC)
Photo
Would anyone have a photo of this fish? Since it was on the main page it will likely see a lot of hits.
Recommended edits
Great job!! To raise to a Good article status, I recommend:
- Add "Distribution and habitat" section. Even though there is a map showing distribution, I think it's best to have a written description of their distribution and habitat.
- Add "Taxonomy" section. Compare and contrast to other types of rays.
Hami910311 (talk) 20:40, 21 November 2013 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.252.110.213 (talk)