Wikipedia:Featured and good topic candidates/Featured log/August 2010

Good topic candidates: view - edit - history

Oryzomys

Oryzomys

10 articles

Oryzomys albiventer

Oryzomys antillarum

Oryzomys couesi

Oryzomys dimidiatus

Oryzomys gorgasi

Oryzomys nelsoni

Marsh rice rat

Parasites

Oryzomys peninsulae

This proposed featured topic covers the rice rat genus Oryzomys: the genus article is an FA, four of the eight species are FAs, the four others are GAs, and the separate list of parasites found on the most well-known species has just been promoted to FL. I have excluded two articles from the topic that deal with poorly known fossils that were originally included in Oryzomys, certainly do not fall within its strict modern definition, but have not been placed in another genus: Oryzomys anoblepas and ?Oryzomys pliocaenicus. However, both are GAs and they can be added without hampering the topic's FT status if that is the consensus. Although I wrote all the articles myself, there are many people who helped the topic collect all those stars and plus signs with their helpful reviews and advise. Ucucha 06:32, 15 July 2010 (UTC)

• Am I correct in assuming that the absence of 'Lists of parasites' is due to the paucity of data about their parasites? Guettarda (talk) 14:50, 25 July 2010 (UTC)
  • Yes. Five of the species have no known parasites; O. gorgasi only has two nematodes; O. couesi has seven plus some unspecified ones; O. palustris has about 88. Ucucha 14:58, 25 July 2010 (UTC)

• Support - looks good to me. The scope is neither overly broad, nor is it too narrow, and the articles form a coherent group. They are well written and similar in structure. And, of course, they meet the basic requires in terms of featured and good content. Guettarda (talk) 18:25, 25 July 2010 (UTC)
• Support though I would prefer that O. anoblepas and ?O. pliocaenicus be included. Courcelles (talk) 11:15, 26 July 2010 (UTC)
  • Why? No modern listing of Oryzomys species includes them, and they certainly do not belong with the other species, which are a coherent, monophyletic group. The only reason they still have the "Oryzomys" name is that the material is so bad that no one dares to formally place it in another genus (pliocaenicus) or because no one has bothered to look at it and check what it actually is (anoblepas). But thanks for the support :-) Ucucha 12:26, 26 July 2010 (UTC)
• Support - Really, really enjoy reading Ucucha's rat articles. They're well-written, concise, and well-illustrated, and this whole topic is very consistent in that fact. ceranthor 22:22, 4 August 2010 (UTC)
• Support having seen the rest of the articles, I gladly endorse. Sandman888 (talk) ^{Latest PR} 23:14, 20 August 2010 (UTC)

• Close with consensus to promote. Wizardman _{Operation Big Bear} 02:48, 25 August 2010 (UTC)