Talk:Mauritian tomb bat

References

This is where you should put any credible sources of information --Artemis Gray (talk) 01:15, 16 September 2010 (UTC)

It's great that the ball's rolling, but perhaps before information is added to the article sources can be found and generated, that way you can put them in right after you write the information (this will help you keep track of what came from where and will also make the statements made in the article credible).--NYMFan69-86 (talk) 01:46, 16 September 2010 (UTC)

I was distantly planning to work on this article as part of a series on Malagasy bats, but I'll be happy to see it develop as part of the AP Biology project. I think you'll find, though, that the amount of available sources will be quite limited. You already found the Mammalian Species account, which is a great source, but I don't think there are many others available online (Animal Diversity Web is not considered a reliable source). If necessary, I'll be able to help you get some sources. Ucucha 01:57, 16 September 2010 (UTC)

Thank you very much!--Artemis Gray (talk) 02:08, 16 September 2010 (UTC)

You're in good hands Artemis Gray, reliable sources are Wikipedial gold and no one is better at sniffing them out than Ucucha.--NYMFan69-86 (talk) 14:23, 16 September 2010 (UTC)

Okay, so I am not exactly sure whether or not to list one of my potential references as a source in the main article. I haven't directly quoted anything from it, but should I still list it as a source? If anyone knows the answer feel free to respond. Thanks!--Rebekah best (talk) 23:23, 23 September 2010 (UTC)

Citing a reference has nothing to do with direct quotes. It also has absolutely nothing to do with copyright. It has everything to do with acknowledging where you got the facts or information from in the first place. So, everything you write in the article will have a citation to a source because Wikipedia forbids the inclusion of original research. In other words, everything you write has to come from someplace. You must say where that someplace was within the text itself. Seriously, it isn't difficult or scary to do. Just add the information you find in your source to the article and add an inline citation at the end of the sentence. Be sure the text you add is digested through your brain first and is not a copy or near copy of what is in your source. Cheers, Wassupwestcoast (talk) 00:53, 24 September 2010 (UTC)

Format

May I recommend that if you want to add as you go to the main page, that you use templates for the sections without any information--TimHAllstr (talk) 04:19, 17 September 2010 (UTC)

I wouldn't have empty sub-titles. The article should always have a finished look to it...not a giant "to do" list or "note-to-self". Cheers, Wassupwestcoast (talk) 21:45, 17 September 2010 (UTC)

Potential references

Potential References List
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.
Stuart, Chris; Stuart, Tilde (2001) [1988], Field Guide to Mammals of South Africa, Cape Town, South Africa: Struik Publishers, p. 50, ISBN 1-86872-537-5 {{citation}}: Cite has empty unknown parameters: |chapterurl= and |month= (help)--Rebekah best (talk) 01:15, 20 September 2010 (UTC) Garbutt, Nick (2007). Mammals of Madagascar: A Complete Guide. Yale University Press. p. 67. ISBN 978-0-300-12550-4. {{cite book}}: Cite has empty unknown parameter: |coauthors= (help)--Rebekah best (talk) 01:15, 20 September 2010 (UTC) Taylor (1999) [1998], "ECHOLOCATION CALLS OF TWENTY SOUTHERN AFRICAN BAT SPECIES", South African Journal of Zoology, 34 (3): 114 {{citation}}: Unknown parameter |month= ignored (help) --Rebekah best (talk) 18:07, 4 October 2010 (UTC) --Kimberly fitzgerald (talk) 18:10, 4 October 2010 (UTC)

In-line citations

Repeating what was said just above: please include the citation at the end of the line of text. Right now, none of the sentences have a citation. Identifying where the facts came from once the article is written is unnecessarily difficult. You don't want to delete perfectly good bits of text because no one can come up with the original source. Cheers, Wassupwestcoast (talk) 16:27, 21 September 2010 (UTC)

Master source

I suspect this will be your master source/single best reference.
Taphozous mauritianus by Carol A. Dengis
Mammalian Species,No. 522, Taphozous mauritianus (May 17, 1996), pp. 1-5
Published by: American Society of Mammalogists
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/3504189
Cheers, Wassupwestcoast (talk) 16:40, 21 September 2010 (UTC)

Being that there does not seem to be multitudes of resources on this subject, I would recommend using a master reference as suggested, but set it up so that you reference each page that you use.--TimHAllstr (talk) 01:13, 23 September 2010 (UTC)

How to do things

I've noticed that several project editors seem to be hesitant to add to the project because they don't know what to do. The easiest thing is to imitate a recent Featured Article. For example, Rock Martin was made FA in July 2010. It is an African bird. Mauritian Tomb Bat is African: close enough. So, using the "Edit" tab, examine the article and how it is setup technically - and copy it. For example, do the citations and references exactly like it. Use the "Show preview" button frequently before "Save page" will keep most blunders from ever seeing the light of day. Cheers, Wassupwestcoast (talk) 17:04, 22 September 2010 (UTC)

I've set things up so that the project editors will - more or less- just copy the format. I've included the most common situations of inline citations. The good news is that I think this will be an easy FA: just need to add work and time. Cheers, Wassupwestcoast (talk) 16:41, 23 September 2010 (UTC)

No, no, no..this isn't supposed to be easy!!!! I want some...tears...blood...something!! Haha, just joking. You've done a good service westcoast.  :-)NYMFan69-86 (talk) 17:00, 23 September 2010 (UTC)

The tears and blood come during FAC! Cheers, Wassupwestcoast (talk) 00:45, 24 September 2010 (UTC)

I am just now removing my bandages!--NYMFan69-86 (talk) 18:05, 24 September 2010 (UTC)

Requested Reference

Someone requested the bat selection out of "The Natural History of Madagascar" the other day and I've gotten my grubby hands on its PDF. If someone could enable their email or just give me an address through Facebook or whatnot, I'd be more than happy to send it forward. --Yohmom (talk) 20:40, 24 September 2010 (UTC)

• Thank you Yohmom i am putting it on our reference list as we speak. Thak you! --Jraffe0404 (talk) 16:54, 11 October 2010 (UTC)

Geoffroy speculation

The Geoffroy speculation is reasonable from the Dengis paper because Geoffroy identified the speciment in a paper about the mammals of Egypt. And, Geoffroy was only in Egypt in Napoleans expedition of 1798. Cheers, Wassupwestcoast (talk) 02:21, 25 September 2010 (UTC)

• It is, however, wrong, which is a good reason not to include such speculations in an article. There is a reason no original research is a Wikipedia policy. You can see a revised edition of his original description here; he described a species from Egypt, and in the process compared it to a species from Mauritius (=Île-de-France) which he also named as new. That species is Taphozous mauritianus. Ucucha 02:25, 25 September 2010 (UTC)

Yes, I stand corrected! I'll change the text. Cheers, Wassupwestcoast (talk) 02:27, 25 September 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for the reference! And, the text is now made good. Cheers, Wassupwestcoast (talk) 02:42, 25 September 2010 (UTC)

Distribution

Is there any way to make this section more concise? I haven't looked at a map of Africa in a while, but could we address the region of Africa in which it is mostly found, and then some of the outliers not in that region? Strombollii (talk) 16:05, 25 September 2010 (UTC)

Yes, and eventually a map will be necessary. One more note: why say "dry" and "wet" savanna...why not just say savanna?--NYMFan69-86 (talk) 16:43, 25 September 2010 (UTC)

I agree with you both 110% but considering the "Distribution" section has no inline citation at all, I think questions of style are a bit premature. What this article needs is sourced text. Cheers,Wassupwestcoast (talk) 21:35, 25 September 2010 (UTC)

I agree with you 111%. NYMFan69-86 (talk) 01:25, 26 September 2010 (UTC)

It It It

So which of my illustrious students will take a gander at the behavior section and rectify the over use of the word It. --JimmyButler (talk) 05:00, 26 September 2010 (UTC)

I want to, but I think I'll leave it to the editors...Strombollii (talk) 15:36, 27 September 2010 (UTC)

Quite right...the copy-editor in me is tugging at the chains to get loose.  :-)NYMFan69-86 (talk) 22:22, 27 September 2010 (UTC)

Capatilization

I see an awful lot of "The Mauritian Tomb Bat"...I don't think everyone of those words needs to be capitalized ("bat" I'm positive doesn't need to be).--NYMFan69-86 (talk) 18:55, 26 September 2010 (UTC)

Status -> Conservation

I think the Status section should be renamed: Conservation is what I see in most other articles. Also, note that when two sentences come from the same source, it is unnecessary to provide an in-line citation for both.--NYMFan69-86 (talk) 16:50, 5 October 2010 (UTC)

At this point in the article's development, it is best to provide an in-line citation for each sentence. Why? Well, the sentences are very likely to become separated or combined with other sentences as more text is added to the article. At some point, during FA, you'll be looking at that citation-less sentence wondering where it came from. Cheers, Wassupwestcoast (talk) 02:58, 6 October 2010 (UTC)

I changed status to conservation. whatever :-) Cheers, Wassupwestcoast (talk) 03:08, 6 October 2010 (UTC)

Very true, and thanks for doing that.  :-D--NYMFan69-86 (talk) 14:24, 7 October 2010 (UTC)

Really? I had no idea...

"the bat's eyesight that is superior to that of other insect-eating bats"--bats can see!?

Nevermind...sources support the students here. Sorry!!!--NYMFan69-86 (talk) 02:40, 13 November 2010 (UTC)

I know...I know...but I have to ask...

Shouldn't the "cited texts" be given reference "names" so that the "references" will link down to them?--NYMFan69-86 (talk) 02:34, 26 October 2010 (UTC)

I've done this with the sources already present...view in "edit mode" to see what I did (for future reference).--NYMFan69-86 (talk) 02:42, 13 November 2010 (UTC)

That was a major contribution - I was wondering who made the transformation. Thanks - hopefully they will discover the pattern and follow up with future citations.--JimmyButler (talk) 14:45, 17 November 2010 (UTC)

You're welcome, it was an easy switch. References are tough. I think it should be easier to figure out how to format future citations in this article now.--NYMFan69-86 (talk) 19:14, 17 November 2010 (UTC)

Converting measurements

Measurements in the article should be put into a conversion template. Follow the guidelines here.--NYMFan69-86 (talk) 17:49, 11 November 2010 (UTC)

Introduction

The introduction currently consist of two lines. This section is in dire need of improvement. It is typically a summation of the material that follows. It is not unusual to write it last - after the article is fully developed; however, I would attempt some sort of summary prior to requesting the peer review (hopefully, before the holidays).--JimmyButler (talk) 14:44, 17 November 2010 (UTC)

Comments

"identified the Mauritian tomb bat" ... as a separate species (?) To identify means to establish something as the same as something. In this he defined a new species.

list of synonyms: missing "and" towards end of list.

The Mauritian tomb bat lives in the open but the genus occupies tomb walls. (Roughly paraphrased, but still, isn't this a contradiction that requires clarification.

"durnal" ==> "diurnal" (?)

Some of the stuff in "Taxonomy" seems to belong in "Behaviour" and "Description". Nice to see some stuff about function.

--Ettrig (talk) 17:25, 18 November 2010 (UTC)

Take note of the above comments students!!!--NYMFan69-86 (talk) 17:28, 18 November 2010 (UTC)

Sevral missspeled words which are in bad ned of corecting. Not vere cool.--JimmyButler (talk) 18:42, 18 November 2010 (UTC)

characterized from other species; -> distinguished from (?)

Wikilinks

Another concern I have (this is a small one) is that there don't appear to be enough w-links. There are entire paragraphs that don't have a single one.--NYMFan69-86 (talk) 22:11, 22 November 2010 (UTC)

Also, whoever introduced the Skinner source - if you identify the specific pages for each inline reference, it will serve to clean up the notes section. In fact, that goes for all of them lacking page id's. Also, another picture to balance the left side and break up the text at the bottom - perhaps a group or one in flight or mom and baby? --JimmyButler (talk) 02:56, 25 November 2010 (UTC)

Referencing errors

Geoffrey, E. (1818), This reference in the article is completely misrepresented. Where did you get Geoffrey, E. as the author? The info is from the encyclopedia of life - which I think uses the Animal Diversity Web-site. Taphozous mauritianus E. Geoffroy, 1818 That title is the name of the bat and the person receiving credit for naming it - not the author of the article. Referencing information accurately is the most important aspect of what we are learning here. Once one mistake is identified - the entire article is suspect. --JimmyButler (talk) 05:16, 26 November 2010 (UTC)

The web-link for skinner is of limited value - access is limited (I'm not allowed to view the text); although I am given the opportunity to buy the book. some books in "Google Books" have unlimited viewing - I'm guessing this one does not. Its still a valid source; just determine the protocol for linking to Google Books--JimmyButler (talk) 05:22, 26 November 2010 (UTC)

This can't be stressed enough: make triple sure all references are formatted correctly. If they are not, all sorts of problems will arise.--NYMFan69-86 (talk) 05:45, 26 November 2010 (UTC)

I will look into it, but user name Rickabaugh has become the guru of citations within documents. I will ask him if there is anyway we can meet this week to get them all figured out once and for all.--Jraffe0404 (talk) 03:59, 29 November 2010 (UTC)

I didn't understand myself why Geoffrey was in the article, I found that he named the species, but I didn't see how it came into play. As for the Skinner source, I didn't have much time to look at it, and my priority was fixing the mess, and I used what was already in place. I should have looked at it before hand, but I'll work with User:Jraffe0404 to figure it out. --M rickabaugh (talk) 00:22, 30 November 2010 (UTC)

Taxonomy section - Pre-Peer review

Taxonomy Section --JimmyButler (talk) 15:15, 30 November 2010 (UTC)

• Taxonomy section needs expanding. To include unifying characteristics of the Genus as well as the key traits that separate it from other bats.
• (The contrast between the Egyptian tomb bat is awkwardly phrased. There needs to be a better descriptive sentence to link the two species. Precisely what is the connection between Geoffry and these two species? Is there a historical connection between the two?)
• (Are there any other members of the genus to note? How many share this genus?)
• (Perhaps a brief discussion of common name(rationale)– especially if it varies from area to area.)
• (Any examples of hybridization or sub-species?*)

No subspecies or hybridization was found.

• Any molecular studies – DNA comparisons to establish relationships with other bats?*
• Any research on Evolutionary history – fossil records, to establish relationship with other bats

Evolutionary History

Thanks for the reference! It did have useful information, but I didn't see anything that had anything to do with evolution.--Rebekah best (talk) 03:29, 2 December 2010 (UTC)

It is currently under study by Dr. Nancy Simmons of the AMNH, who is including Taphozous mauritianus in her studies of evolutionary relationships of bats. That was the first step - the obvious follow through would be to seek out Dr. Nancy Simmons work - if it is availbale. --JimmyButler (talk) 15:35, 8 December 2010 (UTC)

The last two things on the list I just need to put a little more good searching in. I am putting it up for review, but they will be addressed. Never fear! --Jraffe0404 (talk) 05:15, 11 December 2010 (UTC)

Description Pre-Peer Review

Description--JimmyButler (talk) 15:32, 30 November 2010 (UTC)

• Provide English equivalents (There is template for that).
• ( Sexes are similar in color and size If there are no sexually dimorphic characteristics then say so directly. If there are any – these need to be addressed.)
• ( “The presence of the dim-light (RH1) gene in both the tomb bats and the Old-World bats suggests convergent evolution] of this gene in a similar light rich environment. “ I thought Africa was included in the Old World; thus are not tomb bats - old world bats? Also, a dim-light gene evolving in a light rich environment? Perhaps the sentence makes sense in the context of the original article; but it seems to need some explaining here. Also I would place this info elsewhere and devote this section to morphology.)
• (The ears are erect with rounded edges and no papillae] on the inner edges. Papillae? Without a link to another article; the typical reader will be at a loss. Perhaps an explanation of the term.)
• (As a larger species of bat, Larger than what - other tomb bats? bats in general? Is it one of the largest bats? If so how does it compare to other bats.)
• Although the name "tomb bat" and the genus Taphozous – (derived from the Greek] word for a grave) – would suggest a dark, closed in habitat, the Mauritian tomb bat lives out in the open This is not a description of the bat - rather a description of its habitat preference - its in the wrong section.

I believe this is here becasue it is getting at the etymology of the name and giving some facts about it. I hesitate to move it.--Jraffe0404 (talk) 05:16, 11 December 2010 (UTC)

• (The term "tomb bat" originated from the genus commonly being seen on the walls of old tombs. This could go in taxonomy or habitat - but not description.)
• (Its semi-diurnal activity has led to the evolution of relatively good eye-sight in tomb bats, unlike most echolocating bats]. I would keep the description section devoted to morphology and place items such as this else where. Perhaps behavior or predatory behavior/nutrition?)

• Maybe an 'Ecology' section?--NYMFan69-86 (talk) 15:41, 30 November 2010 (UTC)

I have merely begun to address the issues raised, and I can probably finish them tomorrow, which should be good. And NYMFan, I think an ecology section would be prime. I just need to get together the information that would need to be Transitioned to it. Thanks you guys. I think it is really beginning to get to take on an acceptable form. I feel as though peer review is going to be brutal, however, even expetionally brutal. Better brace myself. I am determined to submit for at least GA before it is over with. Bring it on. --Jraffe0404 (talk) 04:20, 2 December 2010 (UTC)

Glad to see some enthusiasm. I can offer a full review before PR (on top of teach's ongoing review)...give me a day or two though.--NYMFan69-86 (talk) 04:33, 2 December 2010 (UTC)

Anatomy and Sexual Dimorphism Pre-Peer Review

Anatomy and Sexual Dimorphism --JimmyButler (talk) 15:47, 30 November 2010 (UTC)

• (The bats kidneys have a mean renal index of 5.55 and a "predicted mean maximum urine concentration" of 3,921 mosmol/kg. From this, scientists have "tentatively" come to the conclusion that this species' kidneys offer valuable water conservation that helps it retain liquid The numbers alone offer nothing for even the most advanced reader. Some effort to interpret the data or at least offer a comparison to other bats. Why tentative? Could this be moved to the habitat section as it relates to their ability to tolerate dry conditions?)
• The anatomy section has no transition phrases between unique anatomical features. One fact ends abruptly – followed by a new factoid. It very poorly constructed as an eclectic assemblage of facts. Elaborate on the trivia and organize into paragraphs.
• (There is a small pouch located between the radius and the fifth digit (or basal joint) of the wing, which may be used to store insects while flying If this could also be relocated to feeding behavior - then the remaining material is strictly about sexual dimorphism which would allow you to re-title the section heading as such.)

PLEASE READ IF YOU ARE GOING EDIT!

• I am glad that everybody is helping to get the article ready, but I am seen some pretty ugly edits on here. If you are going to put something into the article, make sure that it makes sense when you put it in, and make sure that you understand what it is saying before you show the world. So far i have learned about everything from bat gestation period to renal physiology. Know it, cause if not it ofter do not make sense and makes the article look really sloppy. Also, make soure that you are not repeating information already in the article, or if you must make sure that you are at least putting in a better, more understandable segment of information. Many people i have seen have put good stuff in, but it is repeated or deleted and replaced with something sloppier and often doesn't make sense. I just wanted to make that known. DON'T STOP ADDING STUFF!!! But when you do make sure that is either a good revision, or good piece of new information. Thanks guys! --Jraffe0404 (talk) 04:28, 2 December 2010 (UTC)

This is Wikipedia. Some edits are useful, some are not. If there not, then you can revert them, see WP:BRD. Regards, SunCreator ^(talk) 20:50, 2 December 2010 (UTC)

Please read WP:SHOUT. Logan _Talk ^{Contributions} 17:27, 3 December 2010 (UTC)

(Sigh) Accept all efforts from a positive perspective - the more corrections and reverts you are able to perform - the more evidence of involvement to include in your portfolio! A plea to the masses for better writing skills - we will not include that effort in futility in the portfolio! Happy editing Jraffe!--JimmyButler (talk) 20:31, 3 December 2010 (UTC)

Yes, good luck! Keep in mind that there are many wikipolicies out there, so many it may be hard to keep track of at times.--NYMFan69-86 (talk) 00:00, 4 December 2010 (UTC)

Thanks Guys, I'll keep these in mind. And Mr. Butler, I just realized this, and I wanted to hit myself. However, it is unlikely that people will read it often enough to catch it. Not a lack of faith in them, just I don't believe that it will change the trend.--Jraffe0404 (talk) 04:01, 5 December 2010 (UTC)

My concerns

Although the following list may seem long, fear not, for it is only a grammar sweep.

Show at own risk.

Lead ("in the Emballonuridae family, found in central and southern Africa"-->"in the Emballonuridae family that is found in central and southern Africa") ("Mauritian Tomb Bats help control pest populations"-->"Mauritian tomb bats") ("his species is listed as least concern on the IUCN Red List"--Wlink Least Concern) ("a wide-range of habitats, including subarid scrub"--unnecessary comma) Taxonomy and Etymology ("he compared it to another newly described bat from Egypt"-as the definition of "it" wasn't even established yet, you many want to say something like "he compared an unknown specimen to another newly..." depending on what the source says of course.) ("does not have an completely white belly"-->a completely white belly) ("Synonyms for the Mauritian tomb bat include Taphozous mauritianus, T. leucopterus, T. dobsoni, T. maritianus var. vinerascens."--the location of this sentence makes for an odd read, try moving it to after "Though first identified...") ("...and the Black-bearded Tomb Bat, among others."--Why does the list stop? Are there many more?) ("The name "tomb bat" and the genus name Taphozous is derived from the Greek word for a tomb or grave"--surely "tomb bat" is not Greek...this may need to be reworked.) ("The term "tomb bat" originated from the genus commonly being seen on"-->"'tomb bat' was given because the genus...") Description ("The dorsal surface of T. mauritianus is mottled color consisting of several shades of brown, gray, and white. This creates a grizzled "salt and pepper" appearance."--can these sentences be combined?) ("The wings are long and narrow, and the wings shorten when"-->"The wings are long and narrow and shorten...") ("a trait unique to this family"--You could have this right on the button, but just to make sure, do you mean the Emballonuridae family?) ("It has a conically shaped face, which is covered in a thin layer of hair."--The previous sentences make this a tad confusing...are you talking about adults or juveniles?) ("The eyes are large (2–3 mm), and it has triangular-shaped ears. The ears are erect with rounded edges and no papillae on the inner edges."--I would combine these two.) (Also with this section in general, I'm unsure of the reason behind the paragraph breaks.) ("The gular sac is, however, present in females depending on"--"however" isn't entirely necessary as there is no contradiction from the previous thought.) ("In females, the genitals are located on the ventral side"--"In females" repetitive with the end of the previous sentence.) Distribution and habitat (I don't think any of those areas in the first paragraph need to be linked.) (The second paragraph can likely be combined into one sentence and assuredly combined into the first paragraph.) ("so long as there is a stable food supply"--I would exclude this (sort of a 'well...duh' phrase).) ("compared to the overall size of organ"--absent "the") ("of 3,921 mosmol/kg.[8], which means the urine"--Don't think a period is needed after 'kg.') ("The research is classified as "tentative" due to the fact that the conclusion is speculated by looking scientific measurements, but cannot yet be determined as scientific fact."--this should probably be sourced and I thinking an "at" is needed between "looking" and "scientific.") ("The bats prefer open, moist savanna with plenty of maneuvering room and that is near roosting sights"--"...maneuvering room and in close proximity to roosting sights.") ("thicker parts of the tropical forests"--can take out "the") ("this species find homes in the cocoa trees"--wlink Cocoa tree) ("The tomb bat prefers sites where there is overhead shelter, but that are in more exposed positions"--Wha?) ("However, with arrival humans, they have"--sentence needs a "the" and an "of"...you can probably guess where.  :-P) ("They choose their day roosts so that the take-off is unhindered."--couple of things, what would it be hindered by and source? Behavior and ecology) ("These groups are usually either made up of entirely male and female individuals, or if they are found in groups together, they are separated by at least 100 mm"--this sentence is a bit confusing...can't offer a remedy because I don't really know what it's saying.) ("Females live together in groups of three to thirty individuals, while males live alone except for during the mating season."--don't need the word "individuals," the comma after it, or the word "for.") (They usually roost with their ventral side flat against the surface.If disturbed, they will fly off"--this can probably be the start of a new paragraph and some spaces are needed between the two sentences.) (The next three or four sentences after the above area are choppy. Some can be combined and I don't think the last one (Stains are often characterized by a rectangular brown shape roughly 150 mm long and 100 mm wide) is necessary.) ("or keeping a wary eye out for predators"--repetition of "eye"...can just say "or looking out for predators") ("They prefer to hunt in in open spaces, such over an"--two "ins" and the word "as" is needed after "such") ("The Mauritian tomb bat captures and consumes its prey on its wing"--maybe "The Mauritian tomb bat captures its prey with and consumes it on its wing"?) The ending sentence of the third paragraph needs a citation ("The bats audible calls to communicate"--"use" between "bats" and "audible") ("They usually wait for complete darkness before foraging. Over open areas, they can detect their prey at long ranges. They periodically make dives when hunting, and with each dive, they increase the rate of echolocation"--I know this has the word "echolocation" in it, but these sentences can be moved up to where the rest of the hunting information is.) ("requency to less than 20 kHz "--wlink Hertz) ("This opens up a broader range of habitats"--I would say something like "increases the range of habitats" simply because the word "opens" is used at the end of the last sentence.) ("Mauritian tomb bats are polygamous."--wlink Polygamy (perhaps...that article seems to only talk about humans)) ("Tomb bats of the subregion of Southern Africa is where two pups are often produced"--wordy, try "South African tomb bats often produce two pups") ("October up through December."--I would take out the word "up"...but it's a style thing, your call.) ("They mate in December and the female is pregnant for four to five months"--maybe say "...and the gestation period is four to five months") "also nurses the young during this time"--unclear what "this time" is...how long are the babies dependent on their mothers? Some more citations are needed toward the end of this last paragraph. Mothers take care of the young after birth. They take care of "after birth"? Yuck. Plancenta is often eaten in mammals. Perhaps you mean they take care of the young, after birth. In which case are you not stating the obvious - is it necessary to care for the young, before birth?--JimmyButler (talk) 15:30, 8 December 2010 (UTC) Conservation ("Although its population and population trend are unknown"-->"...its population size and trend are...")

Ignore any issues already brought up and addressed somewhere else. Feel free to fight me on any of these, I make mistakes too.  :-)--NYMFan69-86 (talk) 03:40, 3 December 2010 (UTC)

If you've addressed a concern, please strike it (like this). Monitoring all the small changes and checking back with my list will create a headache I don't have the time or the medication for. Thank you!  :-) NYMFan69-86 (talk) 16:20, 3 December 2010 (UTC)

Peer review archived

Well the peer review was archived without anyone really coming along. You could throw it up for GA, but be prepared for anything. Best of luck and a happy new year, --NYMFan69-86 (talk) 17:46, 1 January 2011 (UTC)

Is it being archived a good thing?--Artemis Gray (talk) 12:31, 3 January 2011 (UTC)

It just means its over, nobody can go to that page and offer suggestions. Also, it's been taken off this list, so it may be harder for people to find.--NYMFan69-86 (talk) 17:21, 3 January 2011 (UTC)

How did it get archived and why? Just curious. Thanks. --Jraffe0404 (talk) 05:01, 5 January 2011 (UTC)

If there's minimal activity for a long enough period of time (or if nobody really offers input), a bot comes along and archives it (may have to something to do with page length: if it stays too short for too long...goodbye). And your welcome. Any pressure from teach to put it up for GA?--NYMFan69-86 (talk) 05:06, 5 January 2011 (UTC)

No GA's / FA's this year - we are done.--JimmyButler (talk) 15:21, 5 January 2011 (UTC)

Oh wow. Sorry to hear that...--NYMFan69-86 (talk) 16:39, 5 January 2011 (UTC)

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Mauritian tomb bat/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: FunkMonk (talk · contribs) 17:21, 2 November 2013 (UTC)

• Before I can review this, several sourced paragraphs need sources. FunkMonk (talk) 17:21, 2 November 2013 (UTC)
• On second look, it is too far from the minimum requirement to be acceptable at this point, so I'll have to quickfail. FunkMonk (talk) 17:30, 2 November 2013 (UTC)

This looks like nonsense that should be removed?

"In fact, the odds that you are being watched by one right now are quite high."

^ Really? This is an absurd statement that I don't think belongs on Wikipedia. But I'll let someone who's been working on this page decide that for sure. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.181.206.46 (talk) 21:16, 20 April 2015 (UTC)