![]() | Setirostris has been listed as one of the Natural sciences good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it. | ||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||
Current status: Good article |
![]() | This article is rated GA-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
@ Enwebb: IF you are interested … This looks like a very fine article, if I check it over would you be able to do the same. This could be the GAN worthy with just a little attention, at a glance, what do you think? cygnis insignis 15:32, 9 January 2019 (UTC)
Not convinced this is the species described here, the tail seems to suggest another genus is what I can't look past. Capturing one would also have been exceptionally good luck, unless Bruce (the photographer) knew better I suppose it is something more common at the Mt Isa region. cygnis insignis 19:18, 8 February 2019 (UTC)
GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
Reviewer: Guettarda ( talk · contribs) 16:07, 18 February 2019 (UTC)
First pass, some things that jumped out at me
Little is known of the biology of the species, and it is only recorded at a few locations- this repeats what's in the second paragraph of the lead.
amongst a poorly known group of bats- as an adjective phrase, I think this should poorly-known should be hyphenated (but I may be wrong).
The species S. eleryi has...- Seems redundant; either "the species" or its name.
tiny in size when compared to near relations- I'm not a fan of "tiny in size" (tiny seems sufficient), but the comparison with its near relatives would be more meaningful if there was some info about the range sizes for its close relatives.
remains unknown- "is" would be better than "remains" in this context
is distinguished from other species of the genus; as a monospecific taxon, there are no other species in the genus.
facilitated formal description of the bristle-faced free-tailed bat in 2008- using "bristle-tailed free-tailed bat" here doesn't fit. Mormopterus sp. 6 would work better in this context.
in museum collections- I think "from museum collections" would work better
(Reardon et al., 2008)is a break from normal inline citation style used in this article
especially in the capital territory and New South Wales- I may be wrong, but based on the range map it isn't anywhere near the capital territory
The bat also has the highest mean characteristic frequency (36 kHz) of any Australian Mormopterus- it isn't a Mormopterus any more
a subgenera or perhaps genus. Also "subgenus" not "subgenera", of course
humans (Homo sapiens)- seems redundant
Nice article, quite an interesting read. I will check the sources a little later. Guettarda ( talk) 19:41, 18 February 2019 (UTC)
Most, if not all, other living bat species are placed at the common name. The IUCN uses Hairy-nosed Freetail-bat, and we usually follow them. This one even has controversy over its generic name, so moving it to the common name would be even more of a win. It would also make a future FAC nomination smoother, as this issue doesn't have to be discussed again, which it inevitably will. Pinging Cygnis insignis and Enwebb for thoughts before I begin a formal move request. FunkMonk ( talk) 08:13, 11 January 2020 (UTC)
![]() | Setirostris has been listed as one of the Natural sciences good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it. | ||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||
Current status: Good article |
![]() | This article is rated GA-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
@ Enwebb: IF you are interested … This looks like a very fine article, if I check it over would you be able to do the same. This could be the GAN worthy with just a little attention, at a glance, what do you think? cygnis insignis 15:32, 9 January 2019 (UTC)
Not convinced this is the species described here, the tail seems to suggest another genus is what I can't look past. Capturing one would also have been exceptionally good luck, unless Bruce (the photographer) knew better I suppose it is something more common at the Mt Isa region. cygnis insignis 19:18, 8 February 2019 (UTC)
GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
Reviewer: Guettarda ( talk · contribs) 16:07, 18 February 2019 (UTC)
First pass, some things that jumped out at me
Little is known of the biology of the species, and it is only recorded at a few locations- this repeats what's in the second paragraph of the lead.
amongst a poorly known group of bats- as an adjective phrase, I think this should poorly-known should be hyphenated (but I may be wrong).
The species S. eleryi has...- Seems redundant; either "the species" or its name.
tiny in size when compared to near relations- I'm not a fan of "tiny in size" (tiny seems sufficient), but the comparison with its near relatives would be more meaningful if there was some info about the range sizes for its close relatives.
remains unknown- "is" would be better than "remains" in this context
is distinguished from other species of the genus; as a monospecific taxon, there are no other species in the genus.
facilitated formal description of the bristle-faced free-tailed bat in 2008- using "bristle-tailed free-tailed bat" here doesn't fit. Mormopterus sp. 6 would work better in this context.
in museum collections- I think "from museum collections" would work better
(Reardon et al., 2008)is a break from normal inline citation style used in this article
especially in the capital territory and New South Wales- I may be wrong, but based on the range map it isn't anywhere near the capital territory
The bat also has the highest mean characteristic frequency (36 kHz) of any Australian Mormopterus- it isn't a Mormopterus any more
a subgenera or perhaps genus. Also "subgenus" not "subgenera", of course
humans (Homo sapiens)- seems redundant
Nice article, quite an interesting read. I will check the sources a little later. Guettarda ( talk) 19:41, 18 February 2019 (UTC)
Most, if not all, other living bat species are placed at the common name. The IUCN uses Hairy-nosed Freetail-bat, and we usually follow them. This one even has controversy over its generic name, so moving it to the common name would be even more of a win. It would also make a future FAC nomination smoother, as this issue doesn't have to be discussed again, which it inevitably will. Pinging Cygnis insignis and Enwebb for thoughts before I begin a formal move request. FunkMonk ( talk) 08:13, 11 January 2020 (UTC)