Talk:Blue wildebeest/GA1

GA Review[edit]

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch

Reviewer: Reid,iain james (talk · contribs) 22:15, 21 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Looking good. Straight-off-the-bat, I notice that the lead is quite short compared with the overall size of the article. It should be an overview of the article, so I request that it is expanded. IJReid (talk) 22:15, 21 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The image of the range, unless moved into a different section of the article (such as the "Distribution") should be added as a range map in the taxobox, which would suite it better.

Moved into taxobox.

The captions of images do not say which subspecies the animals pictured belong to. If possible, I would like them to be labelled with the subspecies.

The images don't mention the subspecies in the description, so I am afraid this can not be done.

"Taxonomy and naming" and "Genetics and evolution" could become subsections under classification, and any cladogram showing the phylogenetic placement of the subspecies in the species would be great.

I am not sure if genetics should come under classification. And if we create the section "Classification", I don't think we will have any introductory text for it. I feel it is better as it is, but what are your suggestions?

Well in that case, it is fine as it is.

"The average height is ..." This should be changed to "Their average height..." or "The average height of the species/blue wildebeest"

Done.

"It feeds during both day and night. Water is an essential requirement." two short, choppy sentences that could be merged

I couldn't see how they could be merged. So I merged the first sentence with the one preceding it.

Link William John Burchell and Black Wildebeest in taxonomy

Done.

Are there any pages for the subspecies? If so, could they be linked?

Sorry, none.

Link Parenthesis is first article mention

Done.

I made an edit to the article, how is it?

Your addition to the taxobox is great (I see you like palaentology, your userboxes told me!) I don't mind the subsections in Description, I just renamed "Coloration" as "Colouration", as British English has been used throughout the article. The rest are obviously helpful, thanks for those!

There are other complicated terms people might not understand (even though I do) but they are linked, so I will let it go

Using these terms is inevitable, so we must have them.

That's all for now, more will come later. Good luck with the article Sainsf. IJReid (talk) 22:15, 21 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for taking up the review. I shall try my best to address all the issues. Sainsf <^>_{Talk all words} 11:24, 24 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The article is GA standard once these last comments are fixed. IJReid (talk) 14:25, 24 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your swift response. Fixed all your comments. Sainsf <^>_{Talk all words} 06:46, 25 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Great job! Passing now. IJReid (talk) 13:50, 25 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]