The article was promoted by Ian Rose 16:59, 2 April 2013 (UTC) [1]. reply
Common Starling ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
Toolbox |
---|
I am nominating this for featured article because Jim and I have been working on it since the beginning of the year and we think we have polished it up nicely to FA standard. We await your views, or as Jim succinctly put it, "... we'll throw it to the wolves". Cwmhiraeth ( talk) 10:02, 2 March 2013 (UTC) reply
Image review
Otherwise looks pretty on-target for FA status....
Casliber (
talk ·
contribs) 14:02, 17 March 2013 (UTC)
reply
Support. I think that the comprehensiveness. readability, and artwork of the article is up to FA status. I have not checked conformity to MOS systematically. I have not spot checked sources, because I am not suspicious of factual errors. I am not very good at copy-editing English grammar. Perhaps, people who know more about starlings than me will do a better review. Snowman ( talk) 20:15, 27 March 2013 (UTC) reply
Delegate comments -- I suppose it was bound to catch my eye, but the Australia subsection begins "The Common Starling was originally introduced into Australia to consume insect pests which the birds were known to eat." Using "the birds" this way suggests you mean the starlings, but that'd mean starlings were introduced to Australia to consume insect pests that starlings eat, which sounds curious. Do you mean simply "birds", i.e. other species, birds in general? BTW, I'd say "originally" is redundant unless at some stage they were all eradicated and had to be reintroduced... Cheers, Ian Rose ( talk) 06:41, 1 April 2013 (UTC) reply
The article was promoted by Ian Rose 16:59, 2 April 2013 (UTC) [1]. reply
Common Starling ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
Toolbox |
---|
I am nominating this for featured article because Jim and I have been working on it since the beginning of the year and we think we have polished it up nicely to FA standard. We await your views, or as Jim succinctly put it, "... we'll throw it to the wolves". Cwmhiraeth ( talk) 10:02, 2 March 2013 (UTC) reply
Image review
Otherwise looks pretty on-target for FA status....
Casliber (
talk ·
contribs) 14:02, 17 March 2013 (UTC)
reply
Support. I think that the comprehensiveness. readability, and artwork of the article is up to FA status. I have not checked conformity to MOS systematically. I have not spot checked sources, because I am not suspicious of factual errors. I am not very good at copy-editing English grammar. Perhaps, people who know more about starlings than me will do a better review. Snowman ( talk) 20:15, 27 March 2013 (UTC) reply
Delegate comments -- I suppose it was bound to catch my eye, but the Australia subsection begins "The Common Starling was originally introduced into Australia to consume insect pests which the birds were known to eat." Using "the birds" this way suggests you mean the starlings, but that'd mean starlings were introduced to Australia to consume insect pests that starlings eat, which sounds curious. Do you mean simply "birds", i.e. other species, birds in general? BTW, I'd say "originally" is redundant unless at some stage they were all eradicated and had to be reintroduced... Cheers, Ian Rose ( talk) 06:41, 1 April 2013 (UTC) reply