Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of peramelemorphs/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 Giants2008 via FACBot (talk) 00:25, 3 July 2023 (UTC) [1].[reply]

List of peramelemorphs[edit]

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

Toolbox
Nominator(s): PresN 16:48, 16 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

We've finished off the kangaroos, so now with #28 in our series of animal FLCs we have one last order of Australian marsupials. Peramelemorphia contains the bandicoots and bilbies, with 19 extant species and 3 extinct ones. They're all relatively small, shrewish looking animals, and like with previous Australian lists the extinct species were made extinct in the early to mid 1900s, while a bunch of the species from New Guinea are missing (free) pictures. This is the last list of marsupials or Australian mammals, and the second-to-last single-order list, and it follows the same pattern as the dozen or so single-order lists that have come through here before. Thanks for reviewing! --PresN 16:48, 16 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]


Comments from SilverTiger
  • "... and pig-footed bandicoot were made extinct by the mid-1900s." I suggest rewording to "... and pig-footed bandicoot were driven extinct by the mid-1900s." as the "made extinct" phrase reads a little awkward in my opinion. If all three went extinct during the mid-1900s, perhaps rephrase to "... and pig-footed bandicoot were driven extinct in the mid-1900s."
  • The rest of the lede is lovely, the Classification and Conventions sections are clean and the cladogram is behaving. It's a shame that so many of the species are missing pictures and other data, but that is out of our hands. Happy editing, and thank you for your continued work on these lists. --SilverTiger12 (talk) 23:37, 17 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@SilverTiger12: Switched to "driven" and "in"; sometimes with extinct species it's "last seen in 1910, considered extinct in 1950", which makes it hard to specify, but these three were all last seen in the mid-1900s and then considered extinct in the same time period. Thanks for reviewing! --PresN 00:43, 18 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
And with that correction, Support. SilverTiger12 (talk) 00:45, 18 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Comments
  • My only query is "Habitat: None" - how can it have no habitat? -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 07:01, 18 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@ChrisTheDude: Whoops, fixed. --PresN 12:44, 18 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
AK
  • "peramelemorphs, and" comma seems superfluous
  • "1,000 to 100,000" might want to add "adults" or "mature individuals" after, since most people will assume this includes young
  • "are categorized as endangered species" → just "are endangered" would be fine
  • "were driven extinct" this sounds a bit jarring after the last clause; the previous clause used present tense, so the past here sounds weird.
  • "between the three" → "between three"
  • "driven extinct" → I think "driven to extinction" would sound better. Also maybe for the use in the lead.
  • Our articles on Chaeropus split it into two species, not one as in the list. The split seems pretty widely accepted in the literature; in any case, even if you keep the genus monotypic in the list, you need to change all the Pig-footed bandicoot links to Chaeropus instead of southern pig-footed bandicoot.
  • The rest of the list seems fine. AryKun (talk) 07:32, 19 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    @PresN AryKun (talk) 16:02, 21 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • @AryKun: Done. Since the IUCN still has Chaeropus as one species (and MSW3 did as well) we're stuck with one species here, so changed the link. Thanks for reviewing! --PresN 14:12, 22 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Could you add subspecies and link them in the table then? Or maybe add a note? AryKun (talk) 15:03, 22 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Source review
  • All sources look reliable and I couldn't spot any issues with formatting
  • I added links to two authors in the "Sources" section
  • I checked sources #13, #14, #36, #45 and they were all fine
  • I tried to check the source for the cladogram but it all seemed quite complicated; happy to assume it's fine though
  • I think the note should be sourced

Happy to support. N Oneemuss (talk to me · see my edits · email me) 15:39, 19 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  • Source review – As with the other similar lists I've checked sources for, reference reliability and formatting are fine, and no issues were detected by the link-checker tool. Giants2008 (Talk) 21:28, 24 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Image review – I checked a sampling of the photos used in the article, and all had appropriate free licenses and captions, in the case of the lead images. Also, the maps used had appropriate sourcing when necessary. I did notice that the Pig-footed bandicoot photo didn't have alt text, unlike the others I looked at, so that may be one small thing to address. Giants2008 (Talk) 21:18, 28 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Fixed, thanks! --PresN 22:30, 28 June 2023 (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_list_candidates/List_of_peramelemorphs/archive1&oldid=1163102027"