![]() | White-winged fairywren is a featured article; it (or a previous version of it) has been identified as one of the best articles produced by the Wikipedia community. Even so, if you can update or improve it, please do so. | ||||||||||||
![]() | This article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page as Today's featured article on December 1, 2016. | ||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||
![]() | A fact from this article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the " Did you know?" column on May 10, 2008. | ||||||||||||
Current status: Featured article |
![]() | This article is rated FA-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||
|
A very nice article, a pleasure to read. I have a few suggestions and only one major concern:
nbsp;
) between numbers and units, such as 2 km. (I think I got 'em all)
Most of these are minor things and/or just suggestions; if you have an explanation for why you don't want to take me up on them, that's fine. The citation issue is a problem though: can you dig up a few more review articles or books to replace or supplement the primary sources? Some paragraphs, e.g. under "Behavior" "Breeding" and "Courtship" have only the primary source for a reference.
I'm putting this on hold for a week to get the additional citations. Please don't hesitate to let me know if you need any help, advice, or clarification. Overall very nice work, and it'll pass with flying colors (erk! No pun intended) once the additional refs have been added. delldot talk 22:12, 12 May 2008 (UTC)
I didn't make it through the whole article because I saw a few things with the referencing that still haven't been fixed from the previous review. I'll give it a full review once these have been addressed.
Just to note, of my points from the previous review, 2, 10, 13, and 18 haven't been addressed, but none of them is important and this can easily pass without addressing them. A few minor points, plus the referencing thing:
Sorry to leave this on hold, you two have been great about addressing stuff quickly! 1, 2, and 3 are minor suggestions. Numbers 4, 5, and 6 really must get fixed before I can pass. Gimme a poke on my talk page when they are and I'll finish re-reviewing. delldot on a public computer talk 03:08, 17 May 2008 (UTC)
Yes, this is definitely in great shape now! Here's my breakdown:
1. Well written?: Yes, very well done. Not overly technical, which is quite an accomplishment.
2. Factually accurate?: Reference problems have been thoroughly dealt with. Excellent work with the secondary/tertiary sources, really a great deal of progress was made in a short time.
3. Broad in coverage?: Appears to me to cover everything without unnecessary detail.
4. Neutral point of view?: Fine
5. Article stability?: No problems
6. Images?: Check
Congratulations! Well deserved, I certainly made you work for this one, but I suppose I'll finally let you have it:
;)
delldot on a public computer
talk
07:17, 17 May 2008 (UTC)
Now I'm just being ridiculously nitpicky, since something gives me the impression that this is going to FAC soon ;)
I just couldn't give this article the green circle it so clearly deserves without also giving you some more trouble. :P Congratulations, great work! delldot on a public computer talk 07:17, 17 May 2008 (UTC)
I just gave the article another copyedit. Overall, it looks great. However, I do have a few questions, outlined below:
-In Taxonomy, who are Mack and Schodde and why are they authorities?
-Also in Taxonomy, the article states that Mack gave it the name leuconotus and the following authors, well, followed. However, the specific name is leucopterus. Is this just a typo, or is another author missing? (OK, the mainland and most widely distributed form is the blue leuconotus, but the first one collected was leucopterus on a tiny little island, and is hence nominate race. I have tried to clarify it)
-In the first bit of the subspecies subsection, should the Black-and-White Fairy-wren be in italics?
(yeah, was for emphasis but looks odd next to scientific names, so I dropped it)
-The article could use some more images. I'm assuming that there are no more of the bird, but perhaps a pictures of its habitat could be included? Also, has an attempt been made to get a range map? (I am working on it. Someone is making a map)
-Additionally, the citation format look odd to me and may need to be changed to standard for a FAC; please tell me if it is acceptable though, as it looks simpler than normal.
Again, a pretty good article with just a few potential minor problems. Aso, you may wish to take a glance at the copyedit changes I made to ensure I did not accidentally change the meaning, though I do think I avoided anything like that with this article. Thanks. Rufous-crowned Sparrow ( talk) 16:40, 25 May 2008 (UTC)
I'm not sure who can edit this but WWFW can be found near Inglewood, S. Queensland which is extends the range map far more east (Inglewood is 266 km west of Brisbane) Aviceda talk 07:12, 27 May 2008 (UTC)
I see that this has been discussed at FAC, but this section seems to split the Behaviour section. Should it be a sub-heading? Graham. GrahamColm Talk 09:19, 27 May 2008 (UTC)
Congratulations to all the editors who have helped this article get to Featured Article Status. Reviewers are also thanked because so much time is put into detailed review. Content creators are appreciated for all the work it takes to improve an article. It is hard work to get an article to a place where it is ‘considered the best’ on Wikipedia. Congratulations and Best Regards,
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on White-winged fairywren. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 10:38, 21 September 2017 (UTC)
![]() | White-winged fairywren is a featured article; it (or a previous version of it) has been identified as one of the best articles produced by the Wikipedia community. Even so, if you can update or improve it, please do so. | ||||||||||||
![]() | This article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page as Today's featured article on December 1, 2016. | ||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||
![]() | A fact from this article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the " Did you know?" column on May 10, 2008. | ||||||||||||
Current status: Featured article |
![]() | This article is rated FA-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
A very nice article, a pleasure to read. I have a few suggestions and only one major concern:
nbsp;
) between numbers and units, such as 2 km. (I think I got 'em all)
Most of these are minor things and/or just suggestions; if you have an explanation for why you don't want to take me up on them, that's fine. The citation issue is a problem though: can you dig up a few more review articles or books to replace or supplement the primary sources? Some paragraphs, e.g. under "Behavior" "Breeding" and "Courtship" have only the primary source for a reference.
I'm putting this on hold for a week to get the additional citations. Please don't hesitate to let me know if you need any help, advice, or clarification. Overall very nice work, and it'll pass with flying colors (erk! No pun intended) once the additional refs have been added. delldot talk 22:12, 12 May 2008 (UTC)
I didn't make it through the whole article because I saw a few things with the referencing that still haven't been fixed from the previous review. I'll give it a full review once these have been addressed.
Just to note, of my points from the previous review, 2, 10, 13, and 18 haven't been addressed, but none of them is important and this can easily pass without addressing them. A few minor points, plus the referencing thing:
Sorry to leave this on hold, you two have been great about addressing stuff quickly! 1, 2, and 3 are minor suggestions. Numbers 4, 5, and 6 really must get fixed before I can pass. Gimme a poke on my talk page when they are and I'll finish re-reviewing. delldot on a public computer talk 03:08, 17 May 2008 (UTC)
Yes, this is definitely in great shape now! Here's my breakdown:
1. Well written?: Yes, very well done. Not overly technical, which is quite an accomplishment.
2. Factually accurate?: Reference problems have been thoroughly dealt with. Excellent work with the secondary/tertiary sources, really a great deal of progress was made in a short time.
3. Broad in coverage?: Appears to me to cover everything without unnecessary detail.
4. Neutral point of view?: Fine
5. Article stability?: No problems
6. Images?: Check
Congratulations! Well deserved, I certainly made you work for this one, but I suppose I'll finally let you have it:
;)
delldot on a public computer
talk
07:17, 17 May 2008 (UTC)
Now I'm just being ridiculously nitpicky, since something gives me the impression that this is going to FAC soon ;)
I just couldn't give this article the green circle it so clearly deserves without also giving you some more trouble. :P Congratulations, great work! delldot on a public computer talk 07:17, 17 May 2008 (UTC)
I just gave the article another copyedit. Overall, it looks great. However, I do have a few questions, outlined below:
-In Taxonomy, who are Mack and Schodde and why are they authorities?
-Also in Taxonomy, the article states that Mack gave it the name leuconotus and the following authors, well, followed. However, the specific name is leucopterus. Is this just a typo, or is another author missing? (OK, the mainland and most widely distributed form is the blue leuconotus, but the first one collected was leucopterus on a tiny little island, and is hence nominate race. I have tried to clarify it)
-In the first bit of the subspecies subsection, should the Black-and-White Fairy-wren be in italics?
(yeah, was for emphasis but looks odd next to scientific names, so I dropped it)
-The article could use some more images. I'm assuming that there are no more of the bird, but perhaps a pictures of its habitat could be included? Also, has an attempt been made to get a range map? (I am working on it. Someone is making a map)
-Additionally, the citation format look odd to me and may need to be changed to standard for a FAC; please tell me if it is acceptable though, as it looks simpler than normal.
Again, a pretty good article with just a few potential minor problems. Aso, you may wish to take a glance at the copyedit changes I made to ensure I did not accidentally change the meaning, though I do think I avoided anything like that with this article. Thanks. Rufous-crowned Sparrow ( talk) 16:40, 25 May 2008 (UTC)
I'm not sure who can edit this but WWFW can be found near Inglewood, S. Queensland which is extends the range map far more east (Inglewood is 266 km west of Brisbane) Aviceda talk 07:12, 27 May 2008 (UTC)
I see that this has been discussed at FAC, but this section seems to split the Behaviour section. Should it be a sub-heading? Graham. GrahamColm Talk 09:19, 27 May 2008 (UTC)
Congratulations to all the editors who have helped this article get to Featured Article Status. Reviewers are also thanked because so much time is put into detailed review. Content creators are appreciated for all the work it takes to improve an article. It is hard work to get an article to a place where it is ‘considered the best’ on Wikipedia. Congratulations and Best Regards,
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on White-winged fairywren. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 10:38, 21 September 2017 (UTC)