Talk:House sparrow/GA1

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The House Sparrow article was promoted to Good article designation by User:Sainsf.  – Northamerica1000(talk) 20:41, 8 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

GA Review[edit]

GA toolbox
Reviewing

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

Reviewer: Sainsf (talk · contribs) 15:49, 14 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi! I shall review this article. Looks well-written, rather interesting! Here are my preliminary comments:

Suggestion : Don't you think the article name 'House Sparrow' should be 'House sparrow' as per WP:FNAME and WP:MAMMAL? Could you rename it (move it)? Also change the words 'House Sparrow' to 'house sparrow' in the rest of the article.

No, there's not consensus for universal use of sentence case, and right now bird articles are continuing to be uniform in title case. 160.94.27.160 (talk) 16:28, 17 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
 Done. Well, if they are uniform, then it is good. --Sainsf <^>Talk all words 01:48, 19 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Speciesbox  Done[edit]

  • The speciesbox seems long. Due to the synonyms. No need to delete them, use the text I have used in the example on the right. (I've used taxobox here.)

House sparrow/GA1
Scientific classification
Synonyms
Species synonymy[1]
  • You can mark the colors in the range map with this template:

<div style="text-align:left; "><big>{{Legend2|#00FF00| Natural range|border=1px solid #aaa}}<br> {{Legend2|#009000| Introduced range|border=1px solid #aaa}}</big></div>

Which gives the output:

   Natural range
   Introduced range

Note:The above are just suggestions, not necessary things.

Not too unreasonable, though obviously there is only a species syonymy here. 160.94.27.160 (talk) 16:28, 17 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
So what is your decision, do you apply this template? As well as range map's? --Sainsf <^>Talk all words 02:23, 19 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The range map legend has already been added (and corrected from your version), I don't think the synonymy is needed and it'll look bad to show two "synonyms" labels. —innotata 14:06, 20 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
 Done. Sorry, I forgot to see the article. Fine as it is.--Sainsf <^>Talk all words 12:23, 21 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Lead  Done[edit]

  • Link 'Passeridae'.
    • Passeridae = sparrow in the common sense used in the article. It makes more sense to me to link at the common name, which is mentioned first. 160.94.27.160 (talk) 16:46, 17 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
 Done. --Sainsf <^>Talk all words 01:53, 19 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Also mention the genus and link it in the first line. I see you have already linked it afterwards in lead, just do not keep the link.
    • I think that's too long of a first sentence, they should be short. 160.94.27.160 (talk) 16:46, 17 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
 Done. At least it is in the lead.--Sainsf <^>Talk all words 01:53, 19 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • and can perform complex and unusual tasks to obtain food Can you explain briefly, say in a line, what these acts are? Just give an example.
    • Replacing this in the lead. —innotata 02:02, 18 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
 Done.--Sainsf <^>Talk all words 01:53, 19 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • In the last paragraph, mention the status it is in (Least Concern) as per the IUCN.
 Done.--Sainsf <^>Talk all words 01:53, 19 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note:I suggest you put the 'Systematics' section before 'Description', I think it would look proper.

  • Readers may want to read the description of the animal prior to reading more in-depth information about its etymology, taxonomy and subspecies information. I prefer the section order the way it currently is. Northamerica1000(talk) 11:20, 18 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    • Agree,though I just think these two should at top in some order. —innotata 17:52, 18 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
 Done. Yes, that's a point!--Sainsf <^>Talk all words 01:53, 19 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Description  Done[edit]

  • 'Tail' is not required to be linked.
 Done.--Sainsf <^>Talk all words 02:00, 19 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This section is well in the rest parts.

Systematics  Done[edit]

  • No need to capitalize 'C' in Chaffinch.
See above. 160.94.27.160 (talk) 16:28, 17 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Northamerica1000 had fixed it, let it be as it is. Where to see above, you mean? --Sainsf <^>Talk all words 09:57, 18 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Chaffinch is a species name, and these are capitalised for birds at least at present. —innotata 17:53, 18 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
 Done. If they are capitalized currently, then let it be.--Sainsf <^>Talk all words 01:59, 19 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Most Passer species are dull-coloured birds Make it 'colored' and preferably pale-colored.
No, coloured is British English, which the article uses, —innotata 20:24, 17 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
 Done.--Sainsf <^>Talk all words 09:57, 18 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • In 'Subspecies' link the names of the scientists.
    • See below, and I'm not sure the two remaining are notable—their describing a taxon is not enough. —innotata 20:21, 17 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
 Done. As they are redlinks for now, they may be left.--Sainsf <^>Talk all words 01:59, 19 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • indicus-group and domesticus-group Why is a '-' required? It is not used elsewhere.
    • Here these are adjectives (or whatever you call it) rather than nouns, so hyphens should be used. —innotata 19:50, 17 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
 Done.--Sainsf <^>Talk all words 09:57, 18 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • You don't link other countries, then why Iran? Better not link it, it is not needed.
    • Not sure and don't care myself about this; I think this started with nearly all countries linked. —innotata 19:51, 17 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
 Done.--Sainsf <^>Talk all words 09:57, 18 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Under 'domesticus group', mention who described it and when against P. d. domesticus. For all other such information in the rest of the subspecies, keep them in brackets.
Brackets symbolise the genus being changed, and not following this convention is highly confusing. 160.94.27.160 (talk) 16:28, 17 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I think it better if you mentioned Linnaeus described P. d. domesticus and when, though it is in the line. As: P. d. domesticus Linnaeus, (when?). You get it? --Sainsf <^>Talk all words 01:59, 19 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
This is explained by it being a nominate subspecies—its description is the species description, which is already mentioned. It could say "Linnaeus, 1758", but I think putting its nominate status upfront is good too and this certainly needs to be stated and made clear. —innotata 12:41, 19 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
 Done. Sorry, I didn't know about nominate subspecies. This needn't be written.--Sainsf <^>Talk all words 02:50, 20 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • There are two images in Subspecies. In the captions write P. d. indicus and P. d. balearoibericus, not just subspecies.
    • Done, don't think it matters much though. —innotata 19:52, 17 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
 Done.--Sainsf <^>Talk all words 01:59, 19 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Distribution and habitat  Done[edit]

  • Where introduced, it can spread quickly, sometimes at a rate of over 230 kilometres (140 mi) per year. Can we have a better word than 'spread' here?
    • Proliferate isn't good since this is specifically moving into more areas. What exactly is the problem? 160.94.27.160 (talk) 16:33, 17 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
'Spread' doesn't seem to fit here, why not write 'Where introduced, it can extend its range quickly, sometimes at a rate of over 230 kilometres (140 mi) per year.' ? --Sainsf <^>Talk all words 09:55, 18 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Done. —innotata 18:06, 18 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
 Done. --Sainsf <^>Talk all words 02:01, 19 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Reword In many parts of the world it has become a pest, and a threat to native birds.
    • Altered a little, I suppose "pest" is vague but a threat to native birds is not, but we could instead say it is considered a threat. —innotata 19:54, 17 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
 Done. That is it, I wanted the 'pest' to be removed.--Sainsf <^>Talk all words 09:55, 18 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • A few introductions have died out or been of limited success, such as those to Greenland and Cape Verde. Instead of 'have died out', write 'have failed to thrive', or such.
    • Some have died out (there are no House Sparrows in Greenland); others have been of limited success, which I take to be another way of saying failing to thrive. 160.94.27.160 (talk) 16:33, 17 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
 Done. --Sainsf <^>Talk all words 09:55, 18 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Behavior  Done[edit]

  • In Feeding, first write the part about their diet (which you have presently in the last paragraph), because the reader shall like to know about its diet first, not the ways the bird obtains it.
    • It starts with the main items of House Sparrow diets, and goes in depth (for example on preferred seeds) on those before discussing (secondary) animal items. 160.94.27.160 (talk) 16:43, 17 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
 Done. All right, let it be. --Sainsf <^>Talk all words 09:52, 18 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • In Breeding, see the line House Sparrows can breed in the breeding season immediately following their hatching. Does this bird breed round the year? Or does it have any particular breeding season? According to it, as soon as its egg hatches, the sparrow again mates. Is my inference correct? Else clarify.
    • I don't see how this is unclear: A House Sparrow born in one breeding season may breed in the following one. 160.94.27.160 (talk) 16:43, 17 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Yes but when is the breeding season? Just mention if it can breed any time in the year or is there any particular time.--Sainsf <^>Talk all words 09:52, 18 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
This is discussed elsewhere in the section. House Sparrows are found in both the northern and southern hemispheres, and the tropics, so reasonably covering the timing of breeding would be very lengthy. —innotata 18:01, 18 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
If the breeding time varies geographically, just mention there, it must be in 'Breeding'. I believe this issue will be resolved then.--Sainsf <^>Talk all words 02:11, 19 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Added a little more. —innotata 23:27, 29 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
 Done. Sainsf <^>Talk all words 10:05, 1 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • How many eggs are laid at a time? Though mentioned in 'Eggs and young', just give a rough idea of it here.
    • This could be in the lead if it's not, but it will really be out of place in discussions of courtship and timing etc. 160.94.27.160 (talk) 16:43, 17 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
 Done. Good as it is. --Sainsf <^>Talk all words 09:52, 18 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Before Other males usually do not copulate with the female, mention that it is the dominant male that mates.
    • It's not the dominant male, it's the male mated to the female in question. 160.94.27.160 (talk) 16:43, 17 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Actually I wish to have it mentioned in the line how it is decided which male shall mate. --Sainsf <^>Talk all words 09:52, 18 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The one that's paired and is building a nest with the female is what I meant. —innotata 17:57, 18 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
 Done. So it is the female who chooses her mate. Well and good.--Sainsf <^>Talk all words 02:11, 19 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Pairs copulate frequently and the male mounts the female repeatedly. Do not both the parts of the sentence mean the same thing?
    • During bouts of copulation, there are multiple mountings, will clarify. 160.94.27.160 (talk) 16:43, 17 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
 Done.--Sainsf <^>Talk all words 09:52, 18 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Can you mention how long the copulation usually is? How many ejaculatory thrusts are there?
    • Not sure this is in my sources, esp. The Sparrows, which I can get to sooner. 160.94.27.160 (talk) 16:43, 17 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
      • Not in The Sparrows, not sure it's in the sources I've seen. —innotata 01:28, 18 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Good if you can add, it can wait.--Sainsf <^>Talk all words 09:52, 18 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
To be clearer, not sure this is easy to find or even recorded at all. —innotata 23:47, 29 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Many birds do not find a nest and a mate, and instead may serve as helpers for mated pairs Though there is a link to helpers, could you very briefly say how they help in the mating process?
    • I can't find any details, I'll probably need to look at Pinowski, which could take a while. —innotata 01:55, 18 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
OK, leave this issue till resolved.--Sainsf <^>Talk all words 09:52, 18 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Added "around the nest", since I wouldn't be confident adding further detail without finding a source. —innotata 23:53, 29 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
 Done Sainsf <^>Talk all words 10:05, 1 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • The formation of a pair and the bond between the two birds is tied to the holding of a nest site, though paired House Sparrows can recognise each other away from the nest. By what means can they recognize each other away from the nest? Also, write 'recognise' ans 'recognize'.
    • Probably by plumage and body proportions, will try to check. The article uses BE. 160.94.27.160 (talk) 16:43, 17 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
      • Nothing in The Sparrows. Determining that animals recognise each other does not require determining how, this might not be known. —innotata 01:30, 18 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
If not known, mention this is not known.--Sainsf <^>Talk all words 09:52, 18 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
That's not specifically stated in the sources (which mention this in passing) I can look at. —innotata 17:58, 18 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
 Done. All right, this is not so important. In fact, I was curious myself! --Sainsf <^>Talk all words 02:11, 19 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • In 'Eggs and young', write 9 in words in the line Eggs hatch ... as few as 9. Numbers from one to ten should be written in words, as per MoS. Look for such other instances.
    • This isn't good style, as the MoS says: "Comparable quantities should be all spelled out or all figures: we may write either 5 cats and 32 dogs or five cats and thirty-two dogs" —innotata 01:33, 18 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Then let this be uniform in the whole article-either numbers or words.--Sainsf <^>Talk all words 09:52, 18 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
It's not good style for this to be done throughout an article, with only vaguely similar quantities. —innotata 17:57, 18 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
 Done. As you think right.--Sainsf <^>Talk all words 02:11, 19 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
 Done.--Sainsf <^>Talk all words 02:52, 20 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

(Now that this is a GA) I've added the unanswered questions to the to do, on the talk page. —innotata 03:00, 7 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Survival  Done[edit]

  • The House Sparrow is also a common victim of roadkill; on European roads, it is the bird most frequently found dead. Could you reword this?
    • What needs to be changed? —innotata 02:06, 18 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The latter part seems a bit confusing, I suggest 'the bird is most frequently killed on European roads' or such.--Sainsf <^>Talk all words 09:44, 18 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I don't see what's confusing; your particular phrasing is too vague, suggesting House Sparrows are killed more often on European roads than elsewhere or something. —innotata 21:02, 19 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
 Done. I am sorry. This is a vague issue to raise. Still, it was all mistake. --Sainsf <^>Talk all words 12:25, 21 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Who is Ted R. Anderson?
Say, then. It is necessary for the reader to know.--Sainsf <^>Talk all words 09:44, 18 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Done already. —innotata 17:59, 18 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
 Done, --Sainsf <^>Talk all words 02:12, 19 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: I suggest you make 'Status' in 'Relationship with humans' a separate section.

It is hard to separate as written, but this might be good. 160.94.27.160 (talk) 16:36, 17 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
It shall be convenient. This is not hard work, just change the place of the text, no need of change in the writing, and it is done.--Sainsf <^>Talk all words 09:44, 18 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
No, it isn't the best organisation of the existing text to do so now. —innotata 17:59, 18 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
 Done, --Sainsf <^>Talk all words 02:12, 19 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
And really, this is an aspect of House Sparrows' relationship with humans. —innotata 15:44, 20 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Relationship with humans  Done[edit]

  • In most of the world the House Sparrow is not protected by law. Write 'by the law'.
I don't know what you mean by BE/AE issue.--Sainsf <^>Talk all words 02:23, 19 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
British-American English (and this was added by Jimfbleak I think). —innotata 12:45, 19 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
So are you changing it? --Sainsf <^>Talk all words 02:55, 20 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
It's good to keep this consistent in one version of English, but I'm not sure there's a difference (or one of style) here, or anything wrong about either phrasing. —innotata 14:13, 20 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
 Done.--Sainsf <^>Talk all words 12:26, 21 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I will be having more comments soon, after I read further. Fix these issues till then. I like this article, I will be patient until it becomes GA. Contact me if you want to on my talkpage or here.--Sainsf <^>Talk all words 15:49, 14 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I have added all my comments. Please see to them quickly. Sainsf <^>Talk all words 10:18, 16 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Article updates[edit]

  • Per the information above, the following changes have been made to the article, along with some changes that were not made and rationale why:
 – De-wikified generic link for "tail"
 – Added link to Passeridae article
 – Added to lead: The animal's conservation status is listed as of "near threatened" on the IUCN Red List.
 – chaffinch changed to lower-case
 – Rewrote to: " Where introduced, they can proliferate quickly..."
 – Rewrote to: "In many parts of the world it has been characterized as a pest that may pose a threat to native birds."
 – Rewrote to: "A few introductions have failed to thrive..."
 – Did not wikify Edward I. Gavrilov and M. N. Korelov, since they're red links at this time
 – Did not de-wikify "Iran", because other country articles such as Morocco are linked in the article
—Northamerica1000(talk) 00:10, 17 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Reply to the other comments - under each one - whether you agree or disagree about it. You can delete what you don't think right, I am not so knowledgeable! :) --Sainsf <^>Talk all words 09:19, 17 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I posted my problems those of these changes I reverted, above. —innotata 01:58, 18 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I just added one last comment from 'Breeding'. Else, wherever I have marked  Done, are the resolved issues. In fact, I am learning a lot about House Sparrows here!--Sainsf <^>Talk all words 02:15, 19 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Great improvements! Again sorry for a few vague issues I raised. I think this GA review will end soon, once the remaining issues in 'Behavior' are resolved. Else is quite fine! --Sainsf <^>Talk all words 12:30, 21 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
If these are all the issues, looks like everything's covered. —innotata 23:48, 29 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Great work! I love this article. I am turning it into a GA. Cheers! --Sainsf <^>Talk all words 10:06, 1 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
  1. ^ Summers-Smith 1988, pp. 307–313
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:House_sparrow/GA1&oldid=1136803596"