Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of carnivorans/archive1

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

The list was promoted by The Rambling Man via FACBot (talk) 00:25, 25 April 2021 (UTC) [1].[reply]

List of carnivorans[edit]

List of carnivorans (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Toolbox
Nominator(s): PresN 03:07, 11 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

For nearly two years, I've been nominating lists of species in Carnivora (felids/canids/mustelids/procyonids/ursids/mephitids/viverrids/herpestids/pinnipeds), covering all of the families of animals in the order that could support a list. Above them, however, was a parent list: List of carnivorans (ex. List of species in order Carnivora), which was a simple bulleted list of all of the species in the order. It couldn't be supplanted by the child lists: 4 of the 15 families are too small to support a list, and the concept of "everything in the order" made sense. But a list that had 11 "main" templates and 4 tiny sections wasn't much use to readers, nor was a mile-long duplicative series of tables. So, we arrive at a capstone FLC: Instead of duplicating the child lists by using the same tables to cover all 285 species, we pull back a level to match the scope going up a level, and have tables covering the 129 genera in the order Carnivora, letting viewers see the relationships at that level with child lists to drill down further into individual families. I hope it is interesting to read! Thanks for reviewing. --PresN 03:07, 11 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • Good choice to do by genus!
  • "different" before "body plans" is superfluous
  • Collage selection is nice
  • Subfamily Ailurinae (Gray, 1843) – one genera" and elsewhere: should be one genus
  • "Members of the Canidae family are canids, and include..." and similar elsewhere shouldn't have a comma.
  • "Members of the Mustelidae family are mustelids, and are composed of" It's not 'members are composed of', should be 'members include' like the others
  • I see the pattern for those with multiple species but it's not clear why some genus names have a common name under them and not others
  • I think the diets overuse the word "Primarily". I think it can generally be assumed these are not exhaustive or exclusive lists of everything they can eat. Heck, you can leave off the "eats" and just have a plain list without being a sentence. Though looking at some of the other lists this is used in all of them and I'm surprised I hadn't noticed it before.
  • Odobenidae: lowercase walrus
Looking forward to supporting at FTC as well! Reywas92Talk 20:16, 11 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Reywas92: Addressed all issues, thanks for the compliment! The common names are where the genus has one (and has more than one species); most don't- for example, Canis includes both some wolves and the coyote and golden jackal; there's no common name for the group. It's uncommon enough that I'm willing to drop the whole thing as being awkward for readers. --PresN 03:36, 12 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I would otherwise suggest removing the parentheses and putting the common name with every genus but yeah since many don't have a single one maybe someone else has a suggestion. Nice work, Support. If you have a chance, a review at Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/National recreation area/archive1 would be appreciated. Reywas92Talk 19:28, 12 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Comments
  • "Carnivora can be divided into two suborders: the cat-like Feliformia and the dog-like Caniformia, which are differentiated based on the structure of their ear bones and cranial features." - is there a ref for that sentence in the lead, particularly the last clause? I can't see it sourced anywhere in the body of the article (everything else not cited in the lead seems to be covered by citations in the tables)
  • I can see both "molluscs" and "mollusks" used - personally I didn't even realise it could be spelt both ways but better to be consistent on one or the other
  • That's all I got - fantastic work on this list (and the whole topic)! -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 09:22, 13 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • @ChrisTheDude: Now cited; fixed spelling to "molluscs" - that's the 'correct' scientific spelling (since the genus is mollusca), even if 'mollusks' is a used variant, and it was actually a typo- I didn't realize the k version was a thing and my browser's spellcheck didn't flag it. Thanks! --PresN 03:32, 14 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Nothing caught my eye. Admirable work. ~ HAL333 15:59, 15 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@The Rambling Man: Since this is mine I can't promote it without a signoff from you (since Giants is still off) that it's okay. --PresN 22:41, 23 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

PresN sure, I'll take a look first. The Rambling Man (Stay alert! Control the virus! Save lives!!!!) 06:35, 24 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

  • Plenty of duplicate links, even in the lead, e.g. cats, dogs, Eupleridae, Viverridae, Herpestidae ...
  • Removed the duplicate links in the lead and overview sections
  • Why is only one sentence of the lead cited?
  • Most of the lead is a summary of the tables; the part that isn't (how Caniformia and Feliformia are differentiated) is cited. There was another sentence, but that should have been cited outside of the lead and now is.
  • "Caniformia" is sometimes capitalised mid-sentence, sometimes not, what's the approach?
  • Should be capitalized, now is
  • "'divided into 14 genera and placed inside a single extant subfamily, Caninae" vs "Subfamily Caninae (G. Fischer de Waldheim, 1817) – thirteen genera" i.e. 14 v 13.
  • Fixed, and checked all the other sections for that as well
  • "tail (Wolf)[10]" in sentence case, no need to capitalise.
  • At first I had wanted them all to be capitalized as it's not quite a sentence, but as per below I drifted away from that. Now all in sentence case.
  • "neritic marine" what is that?
  • Moved link to first instance
  • "plus 1 cm (0 in) tail" unhelpful conversion.
  • Removed unhelpful 1 cm conversions
  • "Racoon" typo.
  • Fixed
  • "(brown bear) " etc, you have previously capitalised first word of these names... Quite a few of these.
  • Fixed per above
  • "composed of a two extant species" eh? And one shown.
  • Fixed
  • ISBNs should be consistently formatted.
  • They are (well, fixed one that was off)- ISBNs are formatted a-b-c-d-e, where each section isn't a consistent length but the total length is 13. I formatted all of these using the Library of Congress ISBN formatter.

The Rambling Man (Stay alert! Control the virus! Save lives!!!!) 08:23, 24 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@The Rambling Man: Thank you so much! Some embarrassing inconsistencies here. All fixed now, I think. --PresN 13:55, 24 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Closing note: This candidate has been promoted, but there may be a delay in bot processing of the close. Please see WP:FLC/ar, and leave the {{featured list candidates}} template in place on the talk page until the bot goes through.
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_list_candidates/List_of_carnivorans/archive1&oldid=1019714544"