Talk:Coffin ray/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Casliber (talk · contribs) 13:42, 18 April 2011 (UTC)

Okay - will begin a review and jot queries below. I'll make straightforward copyedits as I go, so correct me if I inadvertently change the meaning Casliber (talk · contribs) 13:42, 18 April 2011 (UTC)

anything to link "histotroph" to?

• Maybe to Ovoviviparity, but there isn't any more info there.

the best thing I think would be to make a page on en.wiktionary on "histotroph" to link to, but tehre is none there yet. If Iget a chance I might make on today. Casliber (talk · contribs) 02:39, 19 April 2011 (UTC)

has there been any cladistic (morphological or molecular/DNA) work to determine how distinctive it is? Own subfamily suggests genetically isolated for a long time. Any other info on family vs subfamily debate?

• The placement of Hypnos in Torpedinidae is based on morphological phylogeny. I've rephrased the section and added a bit to clarify. There isn't really doubt that Hypnos is related to Torpedo but is also highly distinct; authors just differ on what higher rank to give its group. -- Yzx (talk) 01:31, 19 April 2011 (UTC)

It does not occur off Victoria or Tasmania. - any explanation or theory into the disjunct distribution out there (presumably temperature?)?

• Not that I've seen, though temperature's certainly possible.

• Aah, well, if there's nothing written then we can't make it up. Casliber (talk · contribs) 02:35, 19 April 2011 (UTC)

. The tail is extremely reduced - sounds funny - is it vestigial or rudimentary?

:*Changed to neutral "extremely short".

but can survive out of water for hours - "several hours" (??)

• The source doesn't actually include a qualifier for "hours", but I assume at least several.

While not life-threatening, the shock can be quite severe, and is perceivable through a stream of seawater being poured on the ray - took me a couple of reads to figure out what was meant. Would " While not life-threatening, the shock can be quite severe, and can be felt through a stream of seawater being poured on the ray" be clearer (?)

• Split into two sentences.

Any information on why it is inedible?

• Don't know of specific references, but I suspect because it's flabby. "Unpalatable" might be a more apt descriptor, but the source says "not edible".

Let me know of additional issues. -- Yzx (talk) 01:31, 19 April 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for the review. -- Yzx (talk) 03:01, 19 April 2011 (UTC)

1. Well written?:

Prose quality:

Manual of Style compliance:

2. Factually accurate and verifiable?:

References to sources:

Citations to reliable sources, where required:

No original research:

3. Broad in coverage?:

Major aspects:

Focused:

4. Reflects a neutral point of view?:

Fair representation without bias:

5. Reasonably stable?

No edit wars, etc. (Vandalism does not count against GA):

6. Illustrated by images, when possible and appropriate?:

Images are copyright tagged, and non-free images have fair use rationales:

Images are provided where possible and appropriate, with suitable captions:

Overall:

Pass or Fail: