Jump to content

Wikipedia:Good article reassessment/American robin/1

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

American robin

[edit]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch • Watch article reassessment page • GAN review not found
Result: Kept. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 14:52, 18 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

At first glance, the article seems to be outdated. The conservation status, especially the culture section, must also be expanded and the refbomb should be removed. 🍕BP!🍕 (🔔) 11:20, 10 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The 'In culture' section seems quite detailed enough for a species article, with a good diversity of coverage. If there is more it should go in a subsidiary article with a 'main' link here, but that is not a matter for GA or GAR.
Reduced refbombing. Chiswick Chap (talk) 14:24, 10 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Conservation status: .........
Took a look through, and saw a few issues:
  • The map is poor resolution, and inaccurate particularly in respect of the southern edge of the breeding range; it needs re-doing (I might be able to do so later).
  • The vernacular names given for the subspecies ("eastern robin", "Newfoundland robin", etc.) are unverified; they are not used in the reference cited for the subspecies (Clement & Hathway, Thrushes), and should probably be deleted, unless other references can be found (which I doubt; weakly defined subspecies like these rarely get vernacular names).
  • There is far too much repetition of the page name, and even worse, in the possessive case "The American robin's xxxx", which looks awful. All of the latter, and most of the former, should go.
  • I've updated the tally of UK records to the latest available; I think this paragraph could be trimmed though, individual vagrants and their outcomes are too trivial to include here (and I say this even though I saw one of them myself!).
  • The 'Disease and vaccination' header would be better titled just 'Diseases'.
  • The 'Threats' section includes some very poor sentence structure and weird colloquial (unencyclopedic) phraseology - this has already been mentioned on the talk page 2 years ago, but not acted on.

MPF (talk) 13:35, 10 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Chiswick Chap - thanks! - MPF (talk) 16:26, 10 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Wow this is a blast from the past. I'll take a look and see what I can do as well. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 20:08, 10 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comments:

  • The San Lucas robin subspecies is mentioned in the lede as particularly distinctive, but this isn't expanded upon in the body.
    removed (the mention used English subspecies names, criticized already above here).
  • Could a cladogram be added to the Taxonomy section?
    it possibly could, but a phylogeny is certainly not a GAN requirement for an individual species, far less a GAR requirement.
  • There's a single-sentence paragraph in the Culture section.
    fixed. Chiswick Chap (talk) 07:23, 15 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Happy editing, SilverTiger12 (talk) 02:28, 15 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I'm actually impressed by Chiswick's work here in WP (I hope someone tackles Komodo Dragon). I still don't like the structure of the lead a little bit, but regardless of that; the article is looking good. Keep. 🍕BP!🍕 (🔔) 22:33, 16 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Retrieved from "https://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Good_article_reassessment/American_robin/1&oldid=1258173894"