Wikipedia:Peer review/Philippine Tarsier/archive1
Philippine Tarsier[edit]
Much recent work has been done on this. What needs to be cleaned up? What's broken, incorrect, needs fixing? - UtherSRG (talk) 16:04, 27 November 2006 (UTC)
- More wikilinks will be useful. A bit more copyediting will be required (mouse over to see suggestions):
In addition, the unabated hunting of the species by humans for house pets or for trade has contributed to its decline. Hunting tarsiers to sell as pets was until recently, a thriving industry. Because of its adorable and benign appearance, many have been lured to keep the Philippine Tarsier as pets. This demand fuels the capture and illegal trade of the animal further diminishing its remaining number.[17] Moreover, the life span is 24 years when living in the wild, but only 12 when in cages and taken cared of by people. It is also known to die from psychological damage when around humans because its instinct is to be out in the wild. Moreover, its reduced lifespan in captivity is due to the fact that it is easily distressed by being displayed and physically handled during the day contrary to its natural biological rhythm.[17] AZ t 00:32, 28 November 2006 (UTC)
- My comments:
- It has uniquely large goggling eyes (disproportionate to its head and body), listed in the Guinness Book of Records as the largest eyes on a mammal. --- If a direct link to this from the Guinness website is unavailable, is this mentioned in the latest edition of the Guinness Book of World Records?
- Comment on the subsection Conservation Efforts. I think the style of the five sub-subsections are somewhat inconsistent: while most sub-subsections were written in paragraph style, the very first seb-subsection, Legislation, is enumerated. Would be nice if it's written in paragraph form much like the succeeding sub-subsections.
- In-situ conservation was first spelled with the hyphen, but appears in some places without the hyphen. I believe the same thing happened to the phrase "ex-situ" or "ex situ" (I don't know which of these is more appropriate, but at any rate it should be consistent with whichever is chosen between "in-situ" and "in situ").
- Infobox. In some animal articles (for example, great white shark and amur tiger), there is a diagram for the conservation status and a map that shows range distribution of the animal population. Not sure if these are needed, but I think these would be nice touches.
That's all I can say for now...otherwise, I find this an informative (although it's a little heavy on the "Conservation" section :) ---Tito Pao 22:59, 5 December 2006 (UTC)