Talk:Caracal/GA2

GA Review[edit]

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

Reviewer: Cwmhiraeth (talk · contribs) 09:43, 9 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I propose to review this article and will start my review shortly. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 09:43, 9 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

"The caracal is placed in the subfamily Felinae and the family Felidae." - I would have thought family first, subfamily afterwards.
What was the name given to the species by Johann Christian Daniel von Schreber?
"around the split between the Pliocene and the Pleistocene." - I think boundary is a more acceptable word.
"characterised by tufted ears black on the back, long canine teeth, a short face, long legs and a robust build." - These facts are in an odd order. I think it best to start with build, next do head followed by teeth, eyes, ears etc, move on to body, then limbs and finally tail.
"2 centimetres (0.79 in)" - rounding to a single decimal point would be better. This is used twice.

Done all the above.

"Gestation lasts nearly two to three months," - that's a curious statement. Don't they know the precise length?

This is how they put it in most sources. Different studies give different number of days, so this should be the safest way to write it.

"to leap more than 3 metres (9.8 ft)" - 10 ft will be adequate for the conversion. (And in lead)
"The average lifespan of the caracal under captivity is nearly 16 years." - in captivity I would have thought.

Done the above two points.

"The range has diminished considerably in northern and western Africa." - Since when?

Not sure, the source says this is based on a 2005 survey.

"As of 1996, Afghanistan," - This Afghanistan seems out of place.
In some places you use "caracal" as the plural and in others "caracals". You need to be consistent.
"They occur at altitudes ..." the subject of the previous sentence was "Dry areas".
- That's all for now. In general the prose is of good quality and flowing, and the sentences are not too short as in the Springbok. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 18:33, 9 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Looking back now at the lead, I don't think we need the precise length of the eartufts in the opening sentence. In fact we need to know a bit more about the animal before we get on to its eartufts.
Actually, I am not very keen on the way you write your leads, because you seem to merely copy sentences from the body of the text. It would be better if instead you summarised the different sections in straightforward language.
And I don't like the way the first three sentences of the second paragraph of the lead start with a phrase. It's a useful grammatical structure for occasional use but does not need to be repeated too often.
"Although the Sahara Desert and the equatorial forests do not figure in its range, it occurs in several Saharan ranges." - people may find the repeated use of the word "range" confusing.

Done the above seven points.

@Cwmhiraeth: All addressed. Sorry for the late response, busy in real life. Sainsf (talk · contribs) 05:26, 15 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I am happy with the alterations made and have done a little copyediting to the lead. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 09:43, 15 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The article is well written and complies with MOS guidelines on prose, grammar, structure and layout.
The article uses many reliable third-party sources, and makes frequent citations to them. I do not believe it contains original research.
The article covers the main aspects of the subject and remains focussed.
The article is neutral.
The article is stable apart from trivial vandalism.
The images are relevant and have suitable captions, and are properly licensed.

Final assessment - I believe this article reaches the GA criteria. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 09:56, 15 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you! Sainsf (talk · contribs) 09:59, 15 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]