Wikipedia:Peer review/Yellow clown goby/archive1

Yellow clown goby[edit]

Bring it! I want to achieve FA status with this article and welcome all input. Mmoyer 03:18, 29 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Lethargy's review[edit]

You may want to post at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Fishes that this is up for peer review, so some of them can drop in and review this.

Now, here is my brief peer review (keep in mind I may be wrong about some of this):

In the opening sentence, shouldn't Okinawa goby and Yellow coral goby be in bold rather than italics (or perhaps both)?

The Conservation status section is only two sentences long, and all it says is that it isn't under protection and is highly resilient. I don't think this section is really necessary, and it could be merged somewhere else in the article.

"Gobiodon sp. start life as females, and are bi-directional protogynous hermaphrodites, meaning that when paired up, if necessary, one changes sex to form a breeding pair." I feel this is interesting enough that it belongs in the lead section. See: Wikipedia:Lead section for more guidelines on that. --Lethargy 14:22, 30 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Stefans review[edit]

This article is a long way form FA, I have just gone through a long FA process for oceanic whitetip shark, it is now FA, but it was a very lengthy process. See [1] for the comments during the process, and this was the article that was submitted (compare with this article) and this is the diff since nomination and today(very simmilar to nomination). There are actually a few sentences that was not updated and that article complied to many more of the FA norms than this. I'm not saying this is be mean, only to prepare you for the shock if you try to nominate this for FA, peer review is not very active, very few people actually give comments, FA on the other hand is cruel :-).

Ok so on to my basic comments:

Not comprehencive enough, i.e. very short.
No references (i.e. inline notes)
Not well written

minor comments:

use fishbase template for link
fill in all info in taxobox
use a more standard looking distribution map and put it in the taxo box (see WP:Wikiproject Fishes for instructions)
also look at all the style guides and follow them closely. (like non breaking space between numbers and unit and so on)
Unclear to me if this is about the species Gobiodon okinawae or the genus which the taxobox seams to imply?? (is there only one species? if so it should be made clear.

Good luck! Stefan 15:19, 31 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Mmoyers response[edit]

Thank you both for the very useful comments and encouragement. I really do want to achieve FA with this article, so the more prepared I am before submission, the better! Mmoyer 00:53, 1 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]