Talk:Orange-billed lorikeet

Page contents not supported in other languages.
Source: Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.

GA Review

Passed. Jens Lallensack (talk) 13:01, 7 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

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.

GA toolbox
Reviewing
This review is
transcluded from Talk:Orange-billed lorikeet/GA1
. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Jens Lallensack (talk · contribs) 00:52, 5 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]


Will review soon. --Jens Lallensack (talk) 00:52, 5 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  • Range map?
    • This one's too complicated for me to make, will ask another editor.
  • Crop taxonbox image to better show the bird? Compare with other articles.
    • Done on Commons, might take a while to update here.
  • The species feeds on pollen, nectar, flowers, fruits and uncommonly, seeds. – needs additional comma, and maybe write "and, rarely, seeds".
    • Added commas, kept "uncommonly".
  • but are rarely found with species of other genera. – Does this mean there are other species of the same genus that they like to forage with together? If not, why not simply "found with other species"?
    • Yeah, the previous clause says "sometimes forage together with yellow-billed lorikeets at fruiting trees".
      • OK, but why not take my suggestion, which I think is simpler? --Jens Lallensack (talk) 21:00, 6 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Jens Lallensack, done. AryKun (talk) 12:55, 7 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • The orange-billed lorikeet was originally formally described – What does the "originally" add? Remove
    • Removed.
  • As you explain "clade" in a bracket, it would help if you do the same for "clinal", too, as this is even more technical.
    • Added a gloss.
  • Maybe the cladogram could be simplified by just using common names for monotypic taxa, and also use the common names for the Neopsittacus species. Especially because you have not provided the scientific name for the other (yellow-billed lorikeet) in the text, so the reader won't know to what species it refers to.
    • Done.
  • Relationships of Neopsittacus to related genera based on a genetic study published in 2020. – needs inline citation to that study.
    • Seems I miswrote the year, is actually based on a 2023 study that I have cited now.
  • species's range has similar coloration – "species' range" and "a similar coloration"
    • Done.
  • including the rhinonyssid mite Mesonyssus alisteri,[13] the philopterid chewing louse Psittaconirmus zinki,[14] the menoponid chewing louse Eomenopon semilunare,[15] and the rhinonyssid mite Tinaminyssus trichoglossi.[16] – Why not combining the two mites? --Jens Lallensack (talk) 01:17, 5 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • Combined.
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.

Did you know nomination

The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was: promoted by Bruxton talk 15:11, 7 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

(
)

Created by AryKun (talk). Self-nominated at 10:23, 10 November 2023 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/Orange-billed lorikeet; consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.[reply]

  • Interesting article. The stated hook is mentioned is cited in the article and considering the article is GA, I would say it is good to go. Toadboy123 (talk) 08:11, 13 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Toadboy123 and AryKun: The hook may be interesting but I cannot confirm it from the article here. According to our article they are orange-billed. Bruxton (talk) 21:53, 6 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Bruxton, as stated in the article, "Fledglings have yellow beaks, which turn orange at around 6 months of age.", which is why the hook says "young". Don't see an issue with this at all. AryKun (talk) 08:56, 7 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@AryKun: Thanks for the clarification. I found this line in our article; Fledglings have yellow beaks, which turn orange at around 6 months of age.. On page 220 the source: New or Confirmatory Information on Some Species of New Guinean Birds states

The Orange-billed Lorikeet was very tame, and free-flying in the house. It often gave what was presumably a display, by bobbing its head about fifteen times. The bird was acquired as a fledgling. Its beak was then yellow and turned orange after about six months. This may explain some of the misidentifications of these two species, which in the field are virtually only distinguishable by their calls and the colour of their beaks.

This may be enough to state that young lorikeets have yellow bills: I was initially not sure if the observation was anecdotal. Bruxton (talk) 15:05, 7 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Orange-billed_lorikeet&oldid=1203365574"