Wikipedia:Peer review/Macrobdella decora/archive1

Macrobdella decora

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch • Watch peer review

This peer review discussion is closed.

I am looking for feedback in anticipation of a GA nomination. I'm interested in the balance between "too vague a summary" and "too much detail". I think I've managed to get it right, but feedback in that area, and the quality of the writing, would be useful. And of course any other problems with the article.

Thanks, Cremastra ‹ u — c › 16:32, 1 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comments from Z1720

@Cremastra: Comments after a quick skim:

The article suffers from MOS:OVERSECTION. This could be improved upon with additional information to expand these sections. Additional sources can be found at Google Scholar, WP:LIBRARY, archive.org, doaj.org or your local library system.
Conservation status can be added to the article.

I hope this helps. Z1720 (talk) 23:44, 19 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Z1720 Thanks for the input. Can you clarify what you mean about the conservation status? NatureServe's Ontario status in listed, but NatureServe hasn't given status rankings for any other provinces. [1] The IUCN doesn't give a conservation status [2]. Cremastra 🎄 u — c 🎄 14:47, 27 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Cremastra: Biology articles, such as Cherry-throated tanager, sometimes have a conservation section that describe the conservation status and efforts by biologists to preserve the species. If this information is available in reliable sources, I recommend including it. Ontario's status would be enough of a start, and Ontario's conservation efforts can be included. Z1720 (talk) 15:32, 27 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]