Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Banksia canei/archive1

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

The article was promoted by SandyGeorgia 15:29, 27 June 2011 [1].

Banksia canei[edit]

Banksia canei (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Toolbox


Nominator(s): Casliber (talk · contribs) 03:15, 10 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Apologies - I'd meant to do something different, but...well...this one I see as complete to the best of my ability..and the others aren't. Anyone who's read enough about banksias is not obliged to read yet another one. I reckon this is on par with the other 17 or so Banksia Featured Articles. The article is relatively short and I promise to fix quickly. Kudos to J Milburn for a comprehensive GA review and yes this is a wikicup nomination...Cheers (have at it), Casliber (talk · contribs) 03:15, 10 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Sasata comments

d'oh! Casliber (talk · contribs) 05:16, 10 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • any chance of a getting a picture of the whole shrub? Sasata (talk) 04:19, 10 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
my plant died. I have some folks who've been stomping around the Australian Alps looking for it as we speak....Casliber (talk · contribs) 05:16, 10 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Possible additional sources not currently used:
  • Keighery G. (1991). "Banksia canei mountain Banksia in Western Australia". Western Australian Naturalist 18(6): 167–68.
I was shown the place where this happened, one plant or so beside a road (since died). Will add. added a note now (from secondary source about same fact) Casliber (talk · contribs) 21:39, 11 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
right, added now Casliber (talk · contribs) 21:39, 11 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Blake T. (1985). "Eastern Banksia of the B. integrifolia group". Australian Plants 13(105):200–07.
aah, forgot that one, dusted the isue off my shelf and added. Trevor is good at distinguishing them Casliber (talk · contribs) 23:31, 10 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • I question the need for a wikt link to "glisten"
yeah, got a little carried away with wiktionary links..removed... Casliber (talk · contribs) 11:27, 22 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • the term "infructescence" is used first in the taxonomy section, but hasn't been defined or mentioned in the prior Description section
  • define/gloss sister taxa, cladistic
  • "… Alf Salkin coined the term topodeme to indicate a geographically isolated population of plants,[4] the Ancient Greek words topos "place" and deme "people" or "county (population)"." seems to be missing a word
Oops, missed that, added now. Casliber (talk · contribs) 21:02, 21 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Source review - spotchecks not done, can't speak to comprehensiveness. Nikkimaria (talk) 04:36, 11 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  • Be consistent in whether you provide publisher locations, and if you do whether you provide AU states (and if you elect to provide locations, ref 15 needs to be more specific)
yes, yes and done Casliber (talk · contribs) 07:28, 11 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Be consistent in whether you provide publishers for journals
aah, no Casliber (talk · contribs) 07:28, 11 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
//? - the first is more of a name "abridged edition" rather than the usual sense - actually it works ok, now tweaked. Casliber (talk · contribs) 08:17, 11 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
added template. looking into others Casliber (talk · contribs) 22:26, 12 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Is it just a matter of realigning the licence of the derivative image? or...? Casliber (talk · contribs) 22:31, 12 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, simply making sure the licenses are compatible is enough, I reckon. J Milburn (talk) 22:43, 12 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Great - I changed it at commons. When I get a few consecutive minutes today, I'll convert the tif to jpg a bit later. converted image now. Casliber (talk · contribs) 00:22, 13 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Great, thanks. Media all checks out. J Milburn (talk) 12:09, 13 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment: Did you ever make a decision about merging Banksia 'Celia Rosser'? I can't really see any reason to keep it separate (there's enough room in this article for any details) and this article seems unfinished while the merge has not been completed. J Milburn (talk) 19:28, 12 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for reminding me - I was thinking I'd find more info and just use summary in parent article...but I just about everything is is in parent article now anyway, so there is (and will be) no extra detail in the daughter article, so yes, I'mm merge and redirect. Casliber (talk · contribs) 22:09, 12 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

A few thoughts (sorry if I'm repeating myself at any point)-

  • Is Banksia 'Celia Rosser' worth mentioning in the lead?
yes. added now. Casliber (talk · contribs) 01:52, 14 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • "Banksia canei can be distinguished from B. saxicola by the latter's whorled leaf arrangement, and from B. marginata by its larger follicles and sharp points to the leaves.[5]" Short paragraph- does the source mention that these are the most similar species? If so, that's probably worth mentioning, as it clarifies why you're talking about them.
damn these perfunctory guides - none specify these are the most similar in appearance as they are written in very abrupt language, so annoyingly I can't state, "the most similar are..." Casliber (talk · contribs) 13:43, 15 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • "Mt Seldom Seen" Worth a link? Also, isn't that "Mt."?
dot added. But the note is for the track not the mountain as such. Seems this area of victoria has not much on wiki, and I am not familiar with the geography enough yet to figure some broader parent articles to place some of these landforms and tracks into. But will look into it when I can
  • "but later reassessed as B. marginata." but it was?
aha, I have had this discussion elsewhere with Circeus - to my ears adding a mere "was" sounds fine, but other folks have told me it sounds odd without a pronoun thrown in too. In any case I have added "it was" Casliber (talk · contribs) 02:17, 14 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Similar species seems to be spread between taxonomy and description- I appreciate that some are similar in appearance while some are closely related, but it could perhaps do with a closer look.
aargh, it is tricky as the similarities discussed in the taxo section are intimately linked with classification. I will check up on some stuff at home later. Casliber (talk · contribs) 02:13, 14 June 2011 (UTC) to get it all in hte one section, the best flow is by splitting that last sentence in the description and placing the two bits in the taxonomy section. I'll do that if you reckon the article is improved by it. Casliber (talk · contribs) 13:45, 15 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I think the article would read a little better if that was all in one place; the distinction at the moment comes across as a little artificial. If you worry that that would imply a close relation when one does not exist, I can understand that worry, but, regardless, I think it is best reworked to avoid the "tacked on" one sentence paragraph in the description section. J Milburn (talk) 21:50, 15 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Okay, condensed distinguishing features into taxo section. Casliber (talk · contribs) 02:41, 16 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • B. saxicola is not linked in its first non-lead mention, but it is on its second. Same with Alex George.
fixed Casliber (talk · contribs) 02:13, 14 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • I'm not really keen on the way you end a paragraph with "One cultivar has been registered:"
removed and salient point folded into next para Casliber (talk · contribs) 01:52, 14 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • "Unfortunately"- Not so NPOV.
changed to contrastive "However"..Casliber (talk · contribs) 01:48, 14 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Prose and sourcing look good; I think this will make a good addition to the already substantial bank of Banksia FAs. J Milburn (talk) 20:35, 13 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Support. I am happy that this article is ready for featured status. J Milburn (talk) 10:22, 16 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Units check It has a lot of fractional cm. It would be better to switch to mm. It has links to common units like degrees Celsius. It would be better to unlink them. Lightmouse (talk) 19:59, 15 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Converted cm to mm for seed/follicle measurements and delinked temperature measurements Casliber (talk · contribs) 02:49, 16 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. Looks good to me now. Lightmouse (talk) 18:14, 23 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Gnangarra comment
opening sentence of the Distributin and Habitat read awkardly with Several disjunct populations of Banksia canei have been recorded across alpine areas of southeastern Australia, in northeastern Victoria and southeastern New South Wales generally at altitudes of 500 to 1000 m (1500–4000 ft). so I changed it to Several disjunct populations of Banksia canei have been recorded across alpine areas of southeastern Australia, generally at altitudes of 500 to 1000 m (1500–4000 ft) in northeastern Victoria and southeastern New South Wales., yet I think in northeastern Victoria and southeastern New South Wales is kind of redundent to the text alpine areas of southeastern Australia which could be linked to Australian Alps. Yet again its another FA banksia by Cas Gnangarra 06:00, 16 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
yes an improvement - the proposed streamlining is interesting - I guess it depends on readers unfamiliar with Oz, whether geographical or political (state) landmarks....could go either way for mine...Casliber (talk · contribs) 09:52, 16 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • anthesis is acropetal — I know both terms are linked, but I'm sure you could help your readers with a gloss or rewording in English
yes - that's the second bit - " the opening of the individual buds proceeds up the flower spike from the base to the top". Casliber (talk · contribs) 08:36, 17 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • A example of a mammal that pollinates this plant?
Specific pollinators for this plant are very poorly known, with the one species of honeyeater and bees the only ones observed - but obviously we suspect that there is a wide range as all species studied in some detail have loads of pollinators - hence the first covering statement. Casliber (talk · contribs) 08:35, 17 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • so how can we know that it's pollinated by mammals without that having been observed and without being able to give an example? Jimfbleak - talk to me? 10:42, 17 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Aha - here's the thing - every species of banksia studied in detail has shown to have numerous and diverse pollinators to the point where generalising statements such as the first sentence in the Ecology section (which refer to banksias in general). Records flower visitors on B. canei are meagre at best and hence an overriding general statement helps give context to the overview of the species as such. I opined that the article was better with one general statement about pollination to give context to the next sentence which lists critters recorded for the species thus far. Casliber (talk · contribs) 15:34, 19 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Support. I reviewed the prose of the article and made minor tweaks of my own as I went. The details of my review can be found on the FAC talk page. -- Cryptic C62 · Talk 00:18, June 24, 2011 UTC


The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Featured_article_candidates/Banksia_canei/archive1&oldid=1046366323"