Talk:Australian weasel shark: Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added

Inline

Revision as of 16:59, 9 December 2013

Australian weasel shark 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.
Review: December 9, 2013.

Sharks GA‑class Low‑importance

	Sharks portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Sharks, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of sharks on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.SharksWikipedia:WikiProject SharksTemplate:WikiProject Sharksshark
GA	This article has been rated as GA-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Fishes GA‑class Low‑importance

	Fish portal This article is part of WikiProject Fishes, an attempt to organise a detailed guide to all topics related to Fish taxa. To participate, you can edit the attached article, or contribute further at WikiProject Fishes. This project is an offshoot of the WikiProject Tree of Life.FishesWikipedia:WikiProject FishesTemplate:WikiProject FishesFishes
GA	This article has been rated as GA-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Copyright problem removed

This article was based on the corresponding article at fishbase.org or niwascience.co.naz, neither of which are compatibly licensed for Wikipedia. It has been revised on this date as part of a large-scale project to remove infringement from these sources. Earlier text must not be restored, unless it can be verified to be free of infringement. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material; such additions will be deleted. Contributors may use external websites as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences or phrases. Accordingly, the material may be rewritten, but only if it does not infringe on the copyright of the original or plagiarize from that source. Please see our guideline on non-free text for how to properly implement limited quotations of copyrighted text. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously, and persistent violators will be blocked from editing. While we appreciate contributions, we must require all contributors to understand and comply with these policies. (For background on this situation, please see the related administrator's noticeboard discussion and the cleanup task force subpage.) Thank you. --– Sadalmelik ☎ 07:17, 25 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Australian weasel shark/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: J Milburn (talk · contribs) 18:41, 8 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Looks pretty strong, as ever.

"John Stevens and Glen Cuthbert in 1983.[2] Its scientific description was authored by William White, Peter Last, and Leonard Compagno" Do we have articles about any of these people? We certainly do for Zootaxa.

Added some links.

"The large, oval eyes possess nictitating membranes and have a notched posterior rim" Plural eyes, but singular rims?

Fixed.

"octopuses such as Callistoctopus" Callistoctopus species?

Added "spp."

"such as that sharks over 90 cm (35 in) long eat almost nothing else" Do you need "as"?

Removed the "as".

"(see above)" WP:SELF?

Changed to "...habitat shift toward coral reefs".

"particularly for smaller sharks; other cephalopods, mud lobsters, crabs, and echinoderms are rarely consumed." This reads oddly; how about adding "in addition," before "other cephalopods"?

Divided into two sentences.

I'm assuming we don't know how long they live? Are those that are caught used for anything?

There's no longevity data. I looked for references about them being utilized but there wasn't any, so they may be discarded.

Useful link? Another? Another?

Links added.

A distribution category would be good.

Added one.

Very good, as ever. J Milburn (talk) 18:41, 8 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Let me know of further issues. -- Yzx (talk) 21:28, 8 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Very happy with the responses; promoting now. Great work! J Milburn (talk) 16:53, 9 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the review. -- Yzx (talk) 01:18, 10 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

@@ Line 1: / Line 1: @@
-{{GA nominee|16:46, 30 November 2013 (UTC)|nominator=[[User:Yzx|Yzx]] ([[User talk:Yzx|talk]])|page=1|subtopic=Biology and medicine|status=onreview|note=}}
+{{GA|16:59, 9 December 2013 (UTC)|topic=Natural sciences|page=1}}
+{{WikiProject Sharks |importance=low |class=GA}}
-{{WikiProject Sharks |importance=low |class=}}
+{{WikiProject Fishes |importance=low |class=GA}}
-{{WikiProject Fishes |importance=low |class=}}
 == Copyright problem removed ==