Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Goblin shark/archive1

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The following is an archived discussion of a featured article nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured article candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.

The article was promoted by Ian Rose 10:01, 19 May 2013 (UTC) [1].[reply]

Goblin shark[edit]

Goblin shark (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Toolbox
Nominator(s): Yzx (talk) 03:08, 26 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This is one of my favorite sharks, and one of the most visited shark articles on Wikipedia. Now that there's finally decent photos of a fresh specimen available, it felt like time to make this happen. I'm nominating this article because I think it covers most of what's known (which isn't much) about this species. Yzx (talk) 03:08, 26 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]


Support Comments from Jim just a few quibbles Jimfbleak - talk to me? 14:08, 27 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

  • Most adults are between three and four meters (10–13 ft) long, though it
Changed to "It is usually between three and four meters (10–13 ft) long when mature, though can grow considerably larger." -- Yzx (talk) 16:47, 27 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • parabolic, Gulf of Mexico—link?
Links added -- Yzx (talk) 16:47, 27 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • origin of the pectoral fins—does that mean the base?
The "origin" is specifically the most anterior point of the fin base -- Yzx (talk) 16:47, 27 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • pink or tan in color—in color seems redundant
Removed "in color" -- Yzx (talk) 16:47, 27 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • fins margins—possessive needed
Fixed -- Yzx (talk) 16:47, 27 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • After death, its coloration—its is separated from its presumed subject by an intervening sentence
Changed to "the coloration" -- Yzx (talk) 16:47, 27 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Given the depths at which it lives, the goblin shark poses no danger to humans—does that mean that it otherwise might be dangerous?
I suppose maybe, in the sense that any animal can be dangerous under appropriately improbable circumstances -- Yzx (talk) 16:47, 27 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • jaws fetch high prices from collectors.—why? And why just jaws?
Not stated in the source, though I would presume because they're rare. As for why jaws, I guess the same reasons people collect any animal part -- Yzx (talk) 16:47, 27 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • In April 2003, over a hundred goblin sharks were caught off northwestern Taiwan following a major earthquake.—Do we know why the earthquake had this presumed effect?
Nobody knows why, or even that the earthquake was related. I've added to note to make clear that there's no established causation -- Yzx (talk) 16:47, 27 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Ref 24 —retrieval date?
Added -- Yzx (talk) 16:47, 27 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I just wondered if the jaws were used for traditional Chinese medicine like rhino horns etc. If we don't know, fair enough, changed to support above Jimfbleak - talk to me? 05:35, 28 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the review and support. -- Yzx (talk) 16:45, 28 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Image check - all OK (CC 3.0, NOAA, PD-age), sources and authors provided.

  • Just as info, non-US works generally need additional US-copyright tags (fixed one, OK) GermanJoe (talk) 06:59, 30 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Support Comments by Sasata.

  • My suggestions below have been satisfactorily dealt with; I think the article meets the FAC criteria and am happy to support its promotion. Sasata (talk) 18:27, 6 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you. -- Yzx (talk) 20:05, 6 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I'll begin my review with results from a literature search; will add comments about the text soon. Sasata (talk) 07:49, 30 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

  • anything useful in PMID 4792175?
Some of this research is covered in another source in the article -- Yzx (talk) 17:56, 1 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • I found this, not sure if there's anything worth including; also this if you can read French
Added a note from it -- Yzx (talk) 17:56, 1 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Already in article -- Yzx (talk) 17:56, 1 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • This article doi:10.1134/S0032945209030023 reports that the shark was found on a raise (seamount) in the Vavilov Ridge in the equatorial East Atlantic. It says that the collected specimens differs from the holotype in the lack of a "well expressed spiracle" (Unless I'm missing something, spiracles aren't mentioned in this article)
Added info about occurrence on the Mid-Atlantic Ridge
Added note about spiracles being present -- Yzx (talk) 17:56, 1 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • perhaps it should be mentioned that the holotype was captured in the Sagami Bay (according to the previous source)?
Done -- Yzx (talk) 17:56, 1 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
This is an older source -- Yzx (talk) 17:56, 1 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • no mention of the extinct relative Mitsukurina lineata (Probst, 1879)? (see doi:10.1007/s13358-011-0025-4 Should we have an article for this species (and therefore have M. owstoni at the binomial, rather than as a monotypic genus?)
Note about M. lineata added. I've also removed temporal range from the taxobox as this article is about the species, not the genus
The prevalent usage for "goblin shark" is M. owstoni, not the whole genus. There may be cause for a separate article at Mitsukurina, though it's not my preference -- Yzx (talk) 17:56, 1 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • From the title, this article looks similar to another one already cited by Shimada (2005), but I thought I'd mention it here just in case: Shimada, K., Seigel, J.F., 2005. The Relationship between the Tooth Size and Total Body Length in the Goblin Shark, Mitsukurina owstoni (Lamniformes: Mitsukurinidae). Journal of Fossil Research 38, 49–56.
I have no access to this article -- Yzx (talk) 17:56, 1 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • the doi for Caira 1993 is 10.1007/BF00009215
Added -- Yzx (talk) 17:56, 1 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • D. S. Jordan doesn't need to be linked thrice in the taxobox, but how about linking the synonym authorities?
I'm not the one who added the authority links, so I'm ambivalent about their inclusion. Similarly, I'm not convinced that the synonym authorities should be linked (not all of them may be sufficiently notable). I've removed the redundant links for D. S. Starr. -- Yzx (talk) 00:03, 6 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • "on a 107 cm (42 in) long immature" measurement should be hyphenated as it is used adjectivally
I've rearranged it instead; the hyphen doesn't look right with the conversion. -- Yzx (talk) 00:03, 6 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • link Alan Owston
Done. -- Yzx (talk) 00:03, 6 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • "The specimen had been acquired by shipmaster and naturalist Alan Owston, who had given it to Professor Kachiki Mitsukuri at the University of Tokyo, who in turn had brought it to Jordan." why use the past perfect tense instead of the past tense?
Because these events occurred before Jordan made the description. -- Yzx (talk)
I'm not sure I understand. -- Yzx (talk) 00:03, 6 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
As the link explains, it's a suboptimal grammatical construction that is probably best avoided in professional writing.Sasata (talk) 18:27, 6 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I suppose I could change it to "a tengu is a Japanese", but that doesn't read particularly better to me. -- Yzx (talk) 20:05, 6 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • link taxonomic
Done. -- Yzx (talk) 00:03, 6 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • "As the last member of an ancient lineage, retaining several "primitive" traits," the first comma seems unnecessary
The subject of the phrase is "member", not "lineage". I've modified the sentence to make this clearer. -- Yzx (talk) 00:03, 6 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • "There are 35–53 upper and 31–62 lower tooth rows." About how many teeth are within each row?
I've not come across this information. Sources don't usually give it for sharks because it varies and is hard to count definitively (because old teeth are lost and new teeth are growing in constantly). -- Yzx (talk) 00:03, 6 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • link cusp
Done. -- Yzx (talk) 00:03, 6 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • "In the Indo-Pacific, it has been found off ... Australia, and New Zealand." According to the range map, the species has been recorded off the southern and south-eastern shores of Australia, which isn't in the Indo-Pacific; neither is New Zealand.
Added "and Oceania". -- Yzx (talk) 00:03, 6 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • link Madeira, California
Done. -- Yzx (talk) 00:03, 6 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • I'd be interested to know when the captive specimens were kept in the Japanese public aquariums.
I'm not completely sure when the Tokai University specimen was (it was in or before 1990). The Tokyo Sea Life Park one was 2007. -- Yzx (talk) 00:03, 6 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • I suggest adding (ed.) or (eds.) in the "editor-last" parameter of references that are book chapters. It's used in one reference (Birx 2009), but not others, so is inconsistent.
Done. Why doesn't the template do this automatically? Seems like an oversight. -- Yzx (talk) 00:03, 6 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Done, though honestly I find that whole series of categories to be the worst kind of trivia. -- Yzx (talk) 00:03, 6 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Different strokes for different folks, I guess. I find the category useful in my own research. Sasata (talk) 18:27, 6 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
You have "meters" and "m" in different places, may as well make them all the same (either unabbreviated or abbreviated - latter is slightly better due to US spelling looking odd to us foreigners...)
Don't you think it looks weird to use "m" if the numbers are written out? -- Yzx (talk) 20:54, 7 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Oh yes, I'd leave the one which has numbers as words as is, but others I'd convert. Casliber (talk · contribs) 20:58, 7 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Hmm, that would turn "m" into "meters" throughout, increasing the incidence of regional spelling. I think I prefer to keep it as is. -- Yzx (talk) 21:12, 7 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
link Primitive (phylogenetics)?
Done. -- Yzx (talk) 20:54, 7 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support - prose is good and it looks like comprehensiveness is too. The above points are so minor and straightforward as to not uphold this really. Nice read. Casliber (talk · contribs) 20:42, 7 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for reviewing. -- Yzx (talk) 20:54, 7 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Looks great!

  • "Proceedings of the California Academy of Sciences" Worth a redlink?
Added. -- Yzx (talk) 17:26, 9 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • If there are extinct members of this genus, surely both the monotypic category should go, and Mitsukurina should be given an article of its own?
Not sure monotypy is supposed to account for extinct species, but removed the category anyway. I've made a stub for the genus and linked it. -- Yzx (talk) 17:26, 9 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • I'm assuming the lifespan is unknown? Do you perhaps have a source noting that the lifespan is unknown, so that it could be added to the article?
Note added. -- Yzx (talk) 17:26, 9 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Categories for distibution?
Added some. -- Yzx (talk) 17:26, 9 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sure I'll be happy to support once these are resolved. J Milburn (talk) 11:17, 9 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Support. Great stuff. J Milburn (talk) 11:55, 10 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the review and support. -- Yzx (talk) 15:56, 10 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Featured_article_candidates/Goblin_shark/archive1&oldid=1046367708"