Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of birds of Tokelau/archive1

The following is an archived discussion of a featured list nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured list candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.

The list was promoted by Giants2008 via FACBot (talk) 00:25, 5 June 2023 (UTC) [1].[reply]

List of birds of Tokelau

List of birds of Tokelau (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

• Featured list candidates/List of birds of Tokelau/archive1

Nominator(s): AryKun (talk) 04:11, 2 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Another Oceanian bird list, pretty short, with the standard style. AryKun (talk) 04:11, 2 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Nice work! Some comments, all of them optional:

• A separate map of Tokelau could help the reader, as the one with the location on the globe is just a tiny circle.
  • Replaced the map with one of Oceania that slightly magnifies the view to show three distinct atolls.
• The introduced species, does it refer to the chicken or to the actually wild red junglefowl? I'd perhaps also mention it in the intro, where you say 33 species, one introduced.
  • They're feral chickens, but I've kept it as "feral red junglefowl" because the list mentions only Gallus gallus and chickens are a subspecies anyway.
• An information about since when the owl has been locally extinct - as you mention some other birds present before the human contact.
  • I can't find another source mentioning the owl and Tokelau; only the list, which doesn't provide a date. This is probably because of the lack of proper surveys of Tokelau.

And also thank you for checking my nomination. --Tone 13:58, 2 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Tone, I've replied to all of your comments above. AryKun (talk) 05:42, 3 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Support. Tone 07:23, 3 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

EN-Jungwon

• Add url access to ref 18.
  • Done.
• Move categories and defaultsort to the bottom.
  • Done.
• Is there a reason why <references /> instead of {{Reflist}}
  • Not really, it was just what was in the article originally. Replaced.
• Link authors in the references if they have an article.
  • Done; I think only Steadman and Clements have articles.

Thats all. -- EN-Jungwon 09:34, 9 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

EN-Jungwon, I've replied to all your comments. AryKun (talk) 13:10, 9 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Support. If you are interested, could you review Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of Music Bank Chart winners (2018)/archive1, thanks. -- EN-Jungwon 16:31, 9 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Dank

• Standard disclaimer: I don't know what I'm doing, and I mostly
  AGF
  on sourcing.
• As I mentioned in the last review of these bird lists, I really like the approach here.
• "Additionally, Anas ducks are also": You don't need both.
  • Reworded.
• "with other tropical trees like ... also being present.": You don't need both. "Along with other tropical trees like" works, and "X, Y and Z are also present" works.
  • reworded.
• "with medium nasal septum": Nothing wrong with this in isolation, but since you're making an effort to avoid similar jargon in the rest of the article (for instance, you say "with the head", not "with head"), "with medium nasal septa" or "with a medium nasal septum" would be more consistent.
  • Reworded.
• Checking the
  FLC criteria
  :
• 1. Otherwise, the prose checks out. There are no tables.
• 2. The lead meets
  WP:LEAD
  and defines the inclusion criteria.
• 3a. The list has comprehensive items and annotations.
• 3b. The list is well-sourced to reliable sources, and the
  UPSD
  tool isn't indicating any actual problems (but this isn't a source review). All relevant retrieval dates are present.
• 3c. The list meets requirements as a stand-alone list, it isn't a content fork, it doesn't largely duplicate another article (that I can find), and it wouldn't fit easily inside another article.
• 4. It is navigable.
• 5. It meets style requirements. At a glance, the images seem fine.
• 6. It is stable. - Dank (push to talk) 12:31, 9 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Dank, I've replied to all your comments. AryKun (talk) 13:11, 9 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • Support. Well done. You might be interested in reviewing (when this link turns blue) WP:Featured list candidates/List of malvid families/archive1. - Dank (push to talk) 13:12, 9 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Comments from HAL

• "One of the species" --> "One species" would be more concise
  • Done.
• "which consists of quails, partridges, snowcocks, francolins" --> "that consists of quails, partridges, snowcocks, francolins"

• Also, if the family is itself plural here (hence "are"), should that be

• Done.

• The Oxford comma is sometimes used and sometimes not.
  • Added the Oxford comma throughout.

That's all. ~ HAL333 17:44, 12 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

HAL333, I've replied to all your comments. AryKun (talk) 02:12, 13 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

HAL333, just a reminder. AryKun (talk) 15:31, 16 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The Oxford comma issue hasn't been fully fixed (e.g. "slender bodies, long tails and strong legs" and several other spots) but everything else looks good. ~ HAL333 15:33, 16 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Nice catch, these commas are super irritating. I think I've finally got them all; could you check again? AryKun (talk) 15:37, 16 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I fixed the only one I saw.~ HAL333 15:42, 16 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Happy to support. ~ HAL333 15:42, 16 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Source review – Reference reliability and formatting both look okay, and the link-checker tool detects no concerns. Giants2008 (Talk) 21:19, 1 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Closing note: This
  WP:FLC/ar, and leave the {{featured list candidates}} template in place on the talk page until the bot goes through. 22:12, 4 June 2023 (UTC)[reply
  ]