Talk:Scissortail sergeant

Scissortail sergeant was nominated as a Natural sciences good article, but it did not meet the good article criteria at the time (December 28, 2012). There are suggestions on the review page for improving the article. If you can improve it, please do; it may then be renominated.

Peer review for class[edit]

Overall pretty good article, I just made some minor organization and writing changes WolfyFTW (talk) 22:07, 20 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I thought you did a great job on this article—you definitely added the brunt of it, and described the fish’s behavior quite well. I just had a few questions that would hopefully contribute to this article. Regarding parental care, is it possible for you to mention how the male Scissortail Sergeant actually takes care of its brood, discounting the guarding phase? Also, how do the males change gold in color—do they change what they eat? I really liked the Female Choice section, and thought it was really interesting how they lay test clutches just to see if the male will be a good parent. I’m slightly confused about the first paragraph however—why are males less likely to eat their brood if its larger? I thought because it would take more energy for males to defend a larger brood, and because there are more eggs, the males would probably consume some of the eggs. I’m also confused as to why a larger brood size would lower the predation rate. I don’t see any issues with the Filial Cannibalism section. Great job! This was a great read. I didn’t see any grammatical errors, and I liked your sentence structures. Alexliu818 (talk) 21:27, 22 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

You did a great job on the behavior section. I added some more links to both your section and other sections of the article. I also made some very minor edits to grammer and punctuation. As for getting the article to Good Article standing, several major sections should be added to cover physical characteristics, habitat, and other information about the species. The behavior section seems to be complete and in good shape. So hopefully after the article has been expanded and some more sections are added, you will have no trouble getting it to good article. E.middlebrook (talk) 23:26, 26 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

GA Review[edit]

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

Reviewer: Cwmhiraeth (talk · contribs) 14:45, 15 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I plan to review this article and hope to post further comments here when the initial problems are addressed. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 14:45, 15 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The article is unbalanced and not broad in its scope. There is no Description section, or information on ecology, distribution and habitat in the body of the article.
The lead should be a summary of what is contained in the rest of the article and should not introduce information not mentioned elsewhere. Nor does it usually have references because the facts mentioned in the lead should be referenced when they occur in the body of the article. At the moment the lead is not an adequate summary of the contents of the article.
At the moment some paragraphs have no references. There should be at least one per paragraph and more when information comes from multiple sources. See here for guidance on writing references. "Wikipedia's Verifiability policy requires inline citations for any material challenged or likely to be challenged, and for all quotations, anywhere in article space. However, editors are advised to provide citations for all material added to Wikipedia." The references in the article at the moment vary in format and need attention.

If you need any help ask here or on my talk page. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 14:45, 15 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

GA fail[edit]

I do not believe this article meets the criteria for GA status. The Behavior section is very good but the rest of the article is insufficiently broad in its scope as outlined above. It also lacks citations and its lead does not adequately summarise the rest of the article. It could be nominated again for GA when these deficiencies have been overcome. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 14:29, 28 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia Ambassador Program course assignment[edit]

This article was the subject of an educational assignment at Washington University supported by the Wikipedia Ambassador Program during the 2012 Fall term. Further details are available on the course page.

The above message was substituted from {{WAP assignment}} by PrimeBOT (talk) on 16:14, 2 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]