Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch

Reviewer: Jimfbleak - talk to me? 10:21, 11 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• Images appropriate and licensed
• Sources RS, all links work. Could the language of the non-English sources be added please?
  • Done, 2 x Spanish.
• lead six scientific names have been introduced for it, but their consanguinity was not documented until 1998 — unlinked "consanguinity" is a bit technical for the lead. Can names, rather than species, be consanguine anyway?
  • Changed to "common identity".

More later, Jimfbleak - talk to me? 10:33, 11 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for taking up the review! Ucucha 11:50, 11 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• described three new species of Oryzomys — described three new species of Oryzomys rice rats would help your readers a bit
  • Done, and moved the sentences around a little.
• superciliary vibrissae (vibrissae, or whiskers, above the eyes) — since it's a gloss anyway, why not superciliary vibrissae (whiskers above the eyes)?
  • Done.
• In the table, the n column left aligned, other data centred. Not a big deal, but why not centre this one too?
  • Actually, all captions are centered and all cells in the body are left-aligned.
• In the lead the whiskers are 5 cm long, next time they are 50 mm. Inconsistent, esp as the lead is the only cm measurement in the article
  • Changed to mm in lead.
• The species may be expected to reach further north and west, perhaps into Veracruz, southern Mexico, and western Venezuela — I'm not clear whether this is hypothesised actual range or predicted future expansion.
  • The former, clarified.
• per MoS, image captions shouldn't include the article title. It's assumed they show this species unless otherwise stated
  • Changed.
• widely distributed species with a presumably large population that is found in numerous protected areas. — lead said it is rare, here it's widespread and numerous
  • That's part inconsistency in sources. I presume that although it is rare in any given place, it occurs in a lot of places, so the total population is still large.
• Any predators?
  • Nothing I could find.

Jimfbleak - talk to me? 13:00, 11 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Replied above. Ucucha 15:41, 11 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

GA review (see here for criteria)

1. It is reasonably well written.

   a (prose): b (MoS):

2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.

   a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):

3. It is broad in its coverage.

   a (major aspects): b (focused):

4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.

   Fair representation without bias:

5. It is stable.

   No edit wars etc.:

6. It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate.

   a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):

7. Overall:

   Pass/Fail: