Talk:Rice's whale/GA1

GA Review

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch

Reviewer: AryKun (talk · contribs) 14:16, 6 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Article you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. I'm new to reviewing GA's, but I'll try my best. AryKun (talk) 14:16, 6 July 2021 (UTC) The article seems more or less ready to go. I've done some small edits already, and I just have a few comments.[reply]

"underside of the tail is pale to pinkish" should probably specify what color is pale.

Source doesn't specify the color other than "light." Macrophyseter | talk 08:13, 8 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

There are a couple of dublinks- "North Carolina" and "Georgia" being the ones I can see.

Fixed. Macrophyseter | talk 01:54, 11 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think that the images showing the skeletal parts are particularly necessary. The lanternfish and orca pictures also seem superfluous, considering that neither of them actually feature the whale.AryKun (talk) 12:52, 9 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The skeletal parts show various bones that are mentioned in the text that demonstrate morphological distinctiveness; in addition, most other well-attended cetacean articles have images of skeletal material in one way or another, and I don't see how keeping the image harms the quality of the article given its direct relevance to one of the topics. Also, images don't need to depict the subject of the article if its depicting something else that is directly relevant to that subject. For example, the Livyatan article contains three images that do not have the article subject anywhere in them, but they were still accepted because they still demonstrate the biology/ecology of the genus well. In the case of this article, the lanternfish demonstrates the sense of what the Rice's whale might be eating, and the orca image illustrates a better sense of the whale's environment (same with the oil spill image). Macrophyseter | talk 01:54, 11 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

"With extremely low numbers, the Rice's whale also faces the threat of inbreeding depression,which consequentially severely weakens the remaining population's ability to recover and survive due to the reduction of genetic diversity and accumulation of harmful mutations. To assess how well a population can survive on its own in the wild, geneticists employ the 50/500 rule, where the threshold for a population to successfully combat inbreeding depression is 50 individuals and to reduce mutation-creating genetic drift is 500 individuals. Given that the Rice's whale's mature population is far below these thresholds, additional ecological traits such as a k-seletected reproduction strategy slows the chance of recovery even further and puts the species at a high chance of entering a phenomenon known as an extinction vortex. It has been projected that an assumed population of 35 Rice's whales would take 68 years to recover to 500 individuals. During this period, the species is more vulnerable to catastrophic events that can further damage the population's recovery chances. Such catastrophes have already happened, the most devastating being the 2010 Deepwater Horizon oil spill." The paragraph should be reworded a bit, it's a bit awkward to read as it is. In particular, the first sentence and the third sentence need to be rewritten. AryKun (talk) 07:31, 11 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
"with as little as 16 mature individuals" in the lead should probably be replaced with "with other estimates as low as 16 mature individuals"

The estimates are referring to different groups. The 33 estimate is for the population as a whole (mature + juvenile) and the 16 estimate is for matures only. Macrophyseter | talk 17:10, 12 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

"the species declined to its current state" needs tone replaced with "the species' population declined to its current state"

Fixed. Macrophyseter | talk 17:10, 12 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

In "While fin whales (of which the name "finback" applies to today)", the "of which" should be replaced with "to whom".

I don't think you use personal pronouns when referring to a species as a whole. Macrophyseter | talk 17:10, 12 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

"of which its modern geographic isolation was uncovered during the 1990s." is a bit confusing and unclear.

Fixed. Macrophyseter | talk 17:10, 12 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

"triangular-shaped" in Skull should be either triangle-shaped or triangular: personally, I lean towards triangular.

Fixed. Macrophyseter | talk 17:10, 12 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

In "the fringe of these plates throughout the jawline and all baleen in the anterior jaw positions are uniformly cream in color", I think that the "are" should be replaced with "is", as the fringe is presumably a singular noun here.

Pluralizing "fringe." Macrophyseter | talk 17:10, 12 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

In the second sentence in Postcranial, "slightly less" should be replaced with "slightly fewer".

Fixed. Macrophyseter | talk 17:10, 12 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

In "The vertebral formula is as such:", the as such should be removed.

Fixed. Macrophyseter | talk 17:10, 12 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

"The Rice's whale is mainly restricted to the northeastern Gulf of Mexico, specifically to a small stretch along the continental slope between depths of 150–410 meters (490–1,350 ft) within and near the De Soto Canyon off the coast of western Florida, Alabama, and eastern Louisiana that scientists identify as the core habitat range." is confusingly worded and could be stated in a clearer manner.

Fixed. Macrophyseter | talk 17:10, 12 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

This is a bit nitpicky, but "There is neither asymmetric pigmentation on the lower jaws nor blaze or chevron pattering on the body, which distinguishes the Rice's whale from fin whales and Omura's whales." sounds a bit odd and I would prefer it being reworded.
The Phylogeny section seems overly technical. Maybe it could be simplified for a broader audience?

Did some rearrangement to see if that helps. Macrophyseter | talk 20:59, 15 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

"which are creases of integument" doesn't really help clear up what ventral pleats means: if anything, it's even more complicated and difficult to understand.

Reworded and added wikilink. Macrophyseter | talk 20:59, 15 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

"discovered in Chandeleur Islands, Louisiana" should probably have a "the" before Chandeleur.

Fixed. Macrophyseter | talk 20:59, 15 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

"which washed up in Tampa Bay, Florida in 2009 and subsequently disposed of via burial" needs a "was" after and.

Fixed. Macrophyseter | talk 20:59, 15 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

You should wikilink "antorbital" and "stylohylal".

Linked latter. The former is an anatomical position term that doesn't really have an article. Macrophyseter | talk 20:59, 15 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

"since over a century ago" should be replaced with "for over a century". AryKun (talk) 06:39, 13 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Fixed. Macrophyseter | talk 20:59, 15 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Macrophyseter: I've done some minor copyediting and passed the article, as the refs all look good, the page is stable, and everything else complies with the GA criteria. AryKun (talk) 12:14, 20 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the review!! Macrophyseter | talk 17:53, 20 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]