Wikipedia:Peer review/Capybara/archive1

Capybara

I've listed this article for peer review because the article is thorough, well-referenced, had ample images to enhance the article, and is of a topic interesting. I believe that it meets the barest minimums for Featured Article status, but needs some polishing, primarily in the area of formatting references to meet FA standards (using the long cite versions rather than simple inline ref tags). There is little more information that could be added to better the article, but it stays away from extraneous or trivial information for the most part. Could this be a potential Featured Article? I would like to know!

Thanks,

VigilancePrime 20:35, 3 December 2007 (UTC)

• A script has been used to generate a semi-automated review of the article for issues relating to grammar and house style. If you would find such a review helpful, please click here. Thanks, APR _t 19:44, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

• It's a great start, but it needs expansion. I'm not sure what all the best subsections are to make sure it's comprehensive, try surveying the best other animal related FA's and see what major sections they use. The best way to expand it is to get a hold of some more reliable sources. Books and or the latest important research articles would be very helpful. - Taxman ^Talk 19:17, 6 December 2007 (UTC)

• Well, right off, the list of where to find capybaras in zoos is out of place in an article. Instead, replace the "captivity" section with a paragraph or two about issues concerning cabybaras in zoos, and link to a separate List of captive capybaras or something similar. Also, the gallery is long, distracting, and not necessary. Simply make sure all images are on The Commons and link to it prominently; having a gallery is unneeded. There also needs to a section (or sections) on capybara biology and physiology. – Quadell ^{(talk) (random)} 19:38, 14 December 2007 (UTC)

From User:SandyGeorgia

Have a look at some featured articles in the Biology section; Bobcat is an example of the increased content that will be needed. There is some WP:OVERLINKing (see WP:MOSLINK), citation formatting needs to be completely reworked (see WP:CITE/ES), there are dead links, see WP:ITALICS on foreign phrases, the gallery should go (see WP:MOS or WP:GTL, can't remember which), review Tony1 (talk · contribs)'s redundancy reducing exercises, the list under captivity should go (see WP:NOT), WP:DASH fixes are needed. Named refs aren't used correctly (see WP:FN), and be sure to ignore the automtated script when it tells you to overlink common words and terms known to most English speakers. See WP:MOS#Images on image sizes, and WP:MOS#Captions on punctuation after sentence fragments on image captions. I left you quite a few sample edits. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 00:24, 17 December 2007 (UTC)

From User:JayHenry

Hi VigilancePrime, I think you're off to a really good start. I've done some work on some animal articles, and here's an outline that I think might work really well for Capybara:

• Lead section & infobox (of course)
• 1 Taxonomy and naming -- to discuss how scientists classify the animal and what names are used.
  • 1.1 Evolution -- it's nice to know how the species evolved (but hard to research)
  • 1.2 Looks like most scientists think there are two species of capybara, so you'll want a section discussing that.
• 2 Description
• 3 Behavior -- you've already got a start to this section.
  • 3.1 Diet
  • 3.2 Reproduction
  • 3.3 Social life (if there's enough info)
• 4 Habitat
• 5 Conservation
  • 5.1 In captivity

That's just a general outline that might work well for this article. And the good news is that you've already got a start to all of those sections! That's just a rough outline, and if you see sections in articles about other animals that might work, you can definitely add them.

I think the biggest challenge will be finding good sources. Right now most of the sources are zoo web sites. Zoo web sites are usually fairly reliable because zookeepers now a lot about the animals in their collection, but the information usually isn't very detailed. In order to get that in depth, really comprehensive information for a Featured Article, you'll want to learn about scientists and conservationists who study capybara and see what the newest information is. Once you start finding some of this research, you'll start finding more details to add to the article. Good luck with it and if you ever need any help, let me know! --JayHenry (talk) 07:07, 19 December 2007 (UTC)