General there is a lot of overlinking, eg Costa Rica, Manuel Antonio National Park, please check and unlink.
I removed many of the extra links. A few items are linked twice because they are in different sections and I thought the 2nd link could be valuable to readers who skipped down to a section.
Rlendog (
talk) 02:12, 27 January 2009 (UTC)reply
The text is a bit wordy in places, and could be trimmed. Too many howevers and it is believed - the latter is a bit weasle-wordy, state it as a fact or say who believes it if it's controversial.
Got rid of those where I found them, and also tightened the wording.
Rlendog (
talk) 02:12, 27 January 2009 (UTC)reply
Good point. I included that in Taxonomy. Thanks for the suggestion.
Rlendog (
talk) 02:12, 27 January 2009 (UTC)reply
Copyedits I've made
these changes. Please check and amend if you are not happy.
They look good. Thanks.
Rlendog (
talk) 02:12, 27 January 2009 (UTC)reply
The ref in the taxobox title is dreadful - it's unnecessary, against MoS and looks awful - you don't need to prove that the species exists
I moved the ref to the lead of the article. The MSW ref in the taxobox is actually pretty standard in mammal articles,
incudingmanyFeaturedArticles.
Rlendog (
talk) 02:12, 27 January 2009 (UTC)reply
Lead Lead section should not be longer than three paras for an article of this length. there is certainly scope for trimming, for example the repetitious first paragraph could be rephrased The Central American Squirrel Monkey (Saimiri oerstedii) is a
squirrel monkeyspecies from the
Pacific coast of
Costa Rica and
Panama. It is restricted to the northwestern tip of Panama near the border with Costa Rica, and the central and southern Pacific coast of Costa Rica, primarily in
Maunuel Antonio and
CorcovadoNational Parks.
males only form dominance hierarchies - repetitious, perhaps - males only do so
But even - why but? no contrast here
I incorporated your suggested wording and tightened the lead up further. It is now 3 paragraphs.
Rlendog (
talk) 02:12, 27 January 2009 (UTC)reply
Description Even if you feel that it is necessary to link the units, you should only do so on the first occurrence.
Done.~~
Distribution and habitat overlinking is rife here, and three very short paras each beginning with species name is not good, I'd condense to two or even one paragraph. What purpose does However serve?
Reworded and fixed the overlinking.
Rlendog (
talk) 02:12, 27 January 2009 (UTC)reply
Social structure35 and 63 hectares.- Needs US conversion
Taxonomy See above for oested, also is it worth saying that its nearest relative in the genus is the
Common Squirrel Monkey, Saimiri sciureus - that seems clear from the genus article
I included the information about Oested and added information about S. oerstedii belonging to the S. sciureus group along with S. scuireus and S. ustus (I'm not sure S. oerstedii is necessarily more closely related to S. scuireus than it is to S. ustus).
Rlendog (
talk) 02:12, 27 January 2009 (UTC)reply
Images appropriate and correctly licensed
References Why is there a linked date in author line of refs 1 and 20? Binomials need italics in Ref 16. refs otherwise comprehensive and appropriate
I italicized the binomial. The liked date is the standard MSW3 citation template that is used as a taxonomy reference in most mammal articles.
Rlendog (
talk) 02:12, 27 January 2009 (UTC)reply
Thank you for your very insightful and helpful comments and the work you put into copyediting. I believe I have addressed the issues.
Rlendog (
talk) 02:12, 27 January 2009 (UTC)reply
Another suggestion, the image in the infobox is not clear, (masked by leaves, trees) I mean it does not present the full view of the monkey, it will be good if a better looking + complete picture is incorporated here, since this will be the first picture to be viewed. --
Bluptr (
talk) 18:24, 26 January 2009 (UTC)reply
That would make a good image. I wish I had that when the article was in DYK. I will try to crop it down and use it in the taxobox (just need to get hold of my wife's computer, which has the necessary software).
Rlendog (
talk) 02:14, 27 January 2009 (UTC)reply
I added the suggested image to the taxobox. I think it looks really good. I did apparently mess up when I saved the cropped file and so the image file name has the word "file" in it. I hope that isn't a problem, since I was not able to move the file to a new name.
Rlendog (
talk) 03:11, 27 January 2009 (UTC)reply
GA
I now think this meets all the criteria for GA, although the prose will need to be a bit tighter if it goes to FAC. A nice article, and the new image is so much better.
jimfbleak (
talk) 07:05, 27 January 2009 (UTC)reply
General there is a lot of overlinking, eg Costa Rica, Manuel Antonio National Park, please check and unlink.
I removed many of the extra links. A few items are linked twice because they are in different sections and I thought the 2nd link could be valuable to readers who skipped down to a section.
Rlendog (
talk) 02:12, 27 January 2009 (UTC)reply
The text is a bit wordy in places, and could be trimmed. Too many howevers and it is believed - the latter is a bit weasle-wordy, state it as a fact or say who believes it if it's controversial.
Got rid of those where I found them, and also tightened the wording.
Rlendog (
talk) 02:12, 27 January 2009 (UTC)reply
Good point. I included that in Taxonomy. Thanks for the suggestion.
Rlendog (
talk) 02:12, 27 January 2009 (UTC)reply
Copyedits I've made
these changes. Please check and amend if you are not happy.
They look good. Thanks.
Rlendog (
talk) 02:12, 27 January 2009 (UTC)reply
The ref in the taxobox title is dreadful - it's unnecessary, against MoS and looks awful - you don't need to prove that the species exists
I moved the ref to the lead of the article. The MSW ref in the taxobox is actually pretty standard in mammal articles,
incudingmanyFeaturedArticles.
Rlendog (
talk) 02:12, 27 January 2009 (UTC)reply
Lead Lead section should not be longer than three paras for an article of this length. there is certainly scope for trimming, for example the repetitious first paragraph could be rephrased The Central American Squirrel Monkey (Saimiri oerstedii) is a
squirrel monkeyspecies from the
Pacific coast of
Costa Rica and
Panama. It is restricted to the northwestern tip of Panama near the border with Costa Rica, and the central and southern Pacific coast of Costa Rica, primarily in
Maunuel Antonio and
CorcovadoNational Parks.
males only form dominance hierarchies - repetitious, perhaps - males only do so
But even - why but? no contrast here
I incorporated your suggested wording and tightened the lead up further. It is now 3 paragraphs.
Rlendog (
talk) 02:12, 27 January 2009 (UTC)reply
Description Even if you feel that it is necessary to link the units, you should only do so on the first occurrence.
Done.~~
Distribution and habitat overlinking is rife here, and three very short paras each beginning with species name is not good, I'd condense to two or even one paragraph. What purpose does However serve?
Reworded and fixed the overlinking.
Rlendog (
talk) 02:12, 27 January 2009 (UTC)reply
Social structure35 and 63 hectares.- Needs US conversion
Taxonomy See above for oested, also is it worth saying that its nearest relative in the genus is the
Common Squirrel Monkey, Saimiri sciureus - that seems clear from the genus article
I included the information about Oested and added information about S. oerstedii belonging to the S. sciureus group along with S. scuireus and S. ustus (I'm not sure S. oerstedii is necessarily more closely related to S. scuireus than it is to S. ustus).
Rlendog (
talk) 02:12, 27 January 2009 (UTC)reply
Images appropriate and correctly licensed
References Why is there a linked date in author line of refs 1 and 20? Binomials need italics in Ref 16. refs otherwise comprehensive and appropriate
I italicized the binomial. The liked date is the standard MSW3 citation template that is used as a taxonomy reference in most mammal articles.
Rlendog (
talk) 02:12, 27 January 2009 (UTC)reply
Thank you for your very insightful and helpful comments and the work you put into copyediting. I believe I have addressed the issues.
Rlendog (
talk) 02:12, 27 January 2009 (UTC)reply
Another suggestion, the image in the infobox is not clear, (masked by leaves, trees) I mean it does not present the full view of the monkey, it will be good if a better looking + complete picture is incorporated here, since this will be the first picture to be viewed. --
Bluptr (
talk) 18:24, 26 January 2009 (UTC)reply
That would make a good image. I wish I had that when the article was in DYK. I will try to crop it down and use it in the taxobox (just need to get hold of my wife's computer, which has the necessary software).
Rlendog (
talk) 02:14, 27 January 2009 (UTC)reply
I added the suggested image to the taxobox. I think it looks really good. I did apparently mess up when I saved the cropped file and so the image file name has the word "file" in it. I hope that isn't a problem, since I was not able to move the file to a new name.
Rlendog (
talk) 03:11, 27 January 2009 (UTC)reply
GA
I now think this meets all the criteria for GA, although the prose will need to be a bit tighter if it goes to FAC. A nice article, and the new image is so much better.
jimfbleak (
talk) 07:05, 27 January 2009 (UTC)reply