Talk:Siberian nuthatch/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Jens Lallensack (talk · contribs) 20:03, 22 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi again, will comment soon! --Jens Lallensack (talk) 20:03, 22 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

not much further than the 105th meridian west – but the 105th meridian west is in America?

Reworded

The Siberian nuthatch was described by the Russian ornithologist Sergei Buturlin in 1907, based on a specimen (holotype) from Verkhoïansk. – Under which name? Already Sitta arctica?

Reworded

and the Siberian nuthatch was subsequently considered a subspecies of the Eurasian nuthatch – give the name of the subspecies? Should that name appear under "synonyms" in the taxonbox?

Included it now in the taxonbox plus named the subspecies.

to the two rocky environment nuthatches – could you check how the sources formulate this?

Reworded into "to the two rock nuthatches"

The "europaea" group – Which species did they include in the "europaea" group? I would provide this information after you discussed the relationships within that group, so that the reader knows what this group is, before learning how the group is related to other clades.

Moved the sentence below and added a few details of it being a sister group

Since you mention and describe a phylogeny, it would really help to include the cladogram here. Let me know if you need help with it.

I did a mini cladogram. If its not okay, I will request. 2001:4455:364:A800:4569:D7A4:92A1:4C9B (talk) 05:59, 23 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

In 2020, a new phylogeny was published covering the genus more comprehensively: it includes the four species mentioned above. – You mention more than four species above.

Reworded

very white – suggest to call this "brilliant white"

Replaced

of the Eurasian nuthatch encountered in the most northern regions, – regions of what? Eurasia, or the range of the Eurasian nuthatch?

Eurasia, reworded.

The oral trait, black, is thinner and shorter than in the latter. – I don't understand this.

Reworded into "The lore is black, thinner and shorter than in the latter."

Moscow Museum say there is little or no clear mark – sounds contradictory. Can we drop "little or"?

Removed

Simon Harrap asserts that the white markings – what white markings? Have these been mentioned before?

Looks like almost Red'kin and Konovalova mentioned it already, I just ended up removing it.

The rufous brown of the rump extends further down the flanks – comparing with S. europaea here? If so, make that clear. --Jens Lallensack (talk) 20:51, 22 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Added "Unlike S. europaea" at the first sentence.

In the French article, there are two nice images, of feet and feathers. Why not include those as well?

Added them

Same with the map showing both arctica and europea; I think this is very helpful.

Added. 180.194.127.148 (talk) 03:17, 23 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

the finer and shorter black loral line, – are you sure this is the correct term? This would be only the line between eye and bill.

Reworded now

and daub the entrance – not sure if this works, but "plasters the entrance" is safer.

Replaced

The main part of its distribution stops in the south, – a distribution cannot "stop" because it is not moving. You want "ends" here.

Replaced.

That's everything; your articles become better! --Jens Lallensack (talk) 21:29, 22 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Or maybe because this article is shorter than others :D. I will try to lower the issues on next article. 2001:4455:364:A800:D101:A7DB:E757:D84D (talk) 08:33, 23 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hehe, lets see :) --Jens Lallensack (talk) 22:39, 23 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

the protonym S. arctica – why protonym? Isn't it the current name?

Ahhhh, I forgot to revert it when I wrongfully added it instead at Kruper's nuthatch article. Replaced into current name

The multi-locus phylogeny based on two mitochondrial and two nuclear genes (see above) – why "see above"? And should it be "a multi-locus …" instead of "The"?

Reverted back into the previous wordings and replaced into "more than four species".

Cladogram needs title stating the source, or a preceding sentence in the main text introducing it.

I made a sentence instead at the main text. Perhaps this is fine? [1] 2001:4455:364:A800:D101:A7DB:E757:D84D (talk) 08:09, 23 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Why do you use "lore" instead of "eyestripe" here?

I translated it and didn't thought that eyestripe can be the same as lore. Replaced.

--Jens Lallensack (talk) 07:28, 23 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Looks good now, congrats. One last point, and this was my oversight: Two of the Commons images I asked you to include (the feet and the feathers) are, from my understanding, possibly copyright violations (and if so, they should never have been uploaded in the first place). I should have checked them before asking you to include them. I just flagged them on Commons, so lets see what the experts there think. It might be prudent to remove them here again for the time being. --Jens Lallensack (talk) 22:39, 23 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I see. Will see what happens. Many thanks for the reviews. 2001:4455:364:A800:F84C:A03F:4FB6:CC70 (talk) 22:44, 23 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

They are slow on Commons, so we can't wait for their decision. I therefore removed them for now, as I am not allowed to pass an article that includes media of disputed licence. --Jens Lallensack (talk) 22:51, 23 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]