Talk:Giant freshwater stingray/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: FunkMonk (talk · contribs) 16:22, 22 December 2013 (UTC)

• Hi there, I'll review this one as well. FunkMonk (talk) 16:22, 22 December 2013 (UTC)
• "confirmed that T. polylepis and H. chaophraya describe the same species" Refer to the same species would make more sense.

• Reworded.

• "reported that it was most closely related to the porcupine ray (Urogymnus asperrimus)" This must in turn have some effect on the generic classification? Himantura is either polyphyletic, or Urogymnus is sunk into it.

• Yes, added a note about it.

• "This species does not appear to be diadromous." Term could be briefly explained in parenthesis.

• Explanation added.

• "both the number and the average size of rays caught have decreased significantly" Any numbers for the size decrease?

• Added some weight info.

Let me know of further issues. -- Yzx (talk) 19:17, 22 December 2013 (UTC)

I should probably had written paraphyletic instead (what does the source say?), but otherwise, everything is nice, so I'll pass it. FunkMonk (talk) 19:27, 22 December 2013 (UTC)

You're right, it's paraphyletic. Thanks for the review. -- Yzx (talk) 19:32, 22 December 2013 (UTC)