Talk:Nicrophorus quadripunctatus

Nicrophorus quadripunctatus was nominated as a Natural sciences good article, but it did not meet the good article criteria at the time (March 22, 2024, reviewed version). There are suggestions on the review page for improving the article. If you can improve it, please do; it may then be renominated.

Insects Low‑importance

	Insects portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Insects, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of insects on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.InsectsWikipedia:WikiProject InsectsTemplate:WikiProject InsectsInsects articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Beetles Low‑importance

	Insects portal Nicrophorus quadripunctatus is within the scope of WikiProject Beetles, an attempt to better organize information in articles related to beetles. For more information, visit the project page.BeetlesWikipedia:WikiProject BeetlesTemplate:WikiProject Beetlesbeetle articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Wiki Education assignment: Behavioral Ecology 2024

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 16 January 2024 and 25 April 2024. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): NHanselman (article contribs).

— Assignment last updated by Sachi.sb (talk) 18:07, 21 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Overall suggestions/comments

This article does a strong job at giving a general overview of the beetle. There is plenty of information provided on the mating process and parental care, but it would be helpful to include more details on how larvae behavior may be affected by this. I added some information under the mating and social behavior section to include how males and females participate in biparental care and how sibling competition can affect larvae behavior. I was wondering what the brood size of this beetle species typically is as this may help build a picture of the intensity of sibling competition larvae face. BreannaY77 (talk) 19:52, 21 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Short overview of article + minor tweak

The article seems clear and understandable, presenting information about the species, its behavior, habitat, diet, and lifecycle, all vital parts of the beetle’s description. It also stayed neutral throughout and there doesn't seem to be any extra, unverifiable facts in the article. One issue I saw was with the citations. A lot of citations had vital important missing information. I went through each citation and did my best to fix them. I also noticed that all the references were duplicated in two sections so I deleted the second section to avoid redundancy.

Bops22 (talk) 20:47, 21 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

GA Review

Unsuccessful. grungaloo (talk) 01:40, 22 March 2024 (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.

This review is transcluded from Talk:Nicrophorus quadripunctatus/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Nominator: NHanselman (talk · contribs)

Reviewer: Grungaloo (talk · contribs) 01:22, 22 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hu NHanselman, thanks for your efforts in improving this article, however unfortunately this is a quickfail as it needs a good deal of work to reach GA. I'd recommend reviewing WP:GACR, in particular 1b and 2b. Some specific issues are:

Large portions of text are uncited. Please review WP:INCITE - citation should be added to the end of the clause, sentence, or paragraph, so long as it's clear which source supports which part of the text. In many cases there are no citations following paragraphs, leaving large potions of the text functionally uncited.
MOS:LEAD - The lead includes information that is not included in the body of the article, such as information on the taxonomy and its descriptions. Conversely, it doesn't mention anything in that's actually in the article. Please read the MOS page for this an ensure you understand whats required in the lead.
Looking on Google Scholar, there appears to be quite a bit written about this beetle that's not included in the article. Here are a few example: [1][2][3][4], and others. For a well-researched beetle I would expect more use of other sources (GACR 3b)
The ref Suzuki, Seizi (2009) is repeated twice in the ref section.

If you need additional help, you can start a post on Wikipedia:WikiProject Insects, someone would likely be willing to help you improve this article. Don't let this discourage you though - the article is overall well written and shows promise. Once you've addressed those issues above I'd highly recommend resubmitting this article for GA. Best of luck. grungaloo (talk) 01:39, 22 March 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.

Overall I found this article to be insightful and full of great information. I had made changes to the overall grammatical structures and went back to hyperlink certain words to add greater depth to the writing overall. I found each section to be done well, and it had a good flow to it. Usertalk: e.kidest — Preceding unsigned comment added by E.kidest (talk • contribs) 04:51, 22 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]