Talk:Black-and-red broadbill

This review is transcluded from Talk:Black-and-red broadbill/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Aircorn (talk · contribs) 07:10, 9 July 2021 (UTC)Reply

Will look at doing thisAircorn (talk) 07:10, 9 July 2021 (UTC)Reply

Ok. A few comments below. They are generally suggestions so don’t feel you have to implement them if you don’t think it will improve the article, but I would appreciate a response to each one.

• Can we wikilink monotypic genus

Done AryKun (talk) 05:48, 13 July 2021 (UTC)Reply

• It gets a bit confusing with all the sisters. Is this important. Would a phylogenic tree be better to represent the relationships

I've added the tree, but I would appreciate it if you went over it once, because I'm not very good at source editing and I might have made some mistakes. AryKun (talk) 11:51, 20 July 2021 (UTC)Reply

• How does the birds of the world citation (number 4) support the preceding sentences in the paragraph

Replaced it with a couple from BHL and Helm's Dictionary. AryKun (talk) 05:48, 13 July 2021 (UTC)Reply

• The references in subspecies do not provide enough information for me to verify them. It’s also odd that they are using a different referencing style
  • Still having a little difficulty with this one. For exampe is J. F. Gmelin, 1788 supposed to be a cite. If it is it is missing some information. Or is it supposed to be who discovered the species and the year they did? If so it is a bit ambiguous. Aircorn (talk) 23:44, 2 August 2021 (UTC)Reply

No, those are the people who described the subspecies and the year, not cites. The format is one from the FA superb fairywren. AryKun (talk) 03:01, 3 August 2021 (UTC)Reply

That format was entered after the article passed FA. Here it is confusing, especially as there is no reference provided at the end of the sentence. I would recommend rewriting it in a format that will not cause confusion. Aircorn (talk) 22:43, 10 August 2021 (UTC)Reply

@Aircorn: I've altered it so that it's clearer. I've put a ref for the number and names of the subspecies at the start of the paragraph (ref no. 8), so I thought that it would be unnecessary to put in inline cites. However, if you want, I'll put them in. AryKun (talk) 10:40, 16 August 2021 (UTC)Reply

I hope you don't mind if I ping Casliber. They are more up with the setup of these articles. If it is a standard style then I will be happy to pass it. Aircorn (talk) 22:39, 16 August 2021 (UTC)Reply

Taking a look now. @Aircorn: formatting and layout is consistent with other bird articles. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 02:23, 17 August 2021 (UTC)Reply

Why are you not using the recommended citations for birds of the world?

Not sure what you mean by that.

At the bottom of the webpage it has a recommended cite eg at appearance it says Kirwan, G. M., J. del Hoyo, M.D. Bruce, and N. Collar (2021). Black-and-red Broadbill (Cymbirhynchus macrorhynchos), version 2.0. In Birds of the World (M. A. Bridwell and B. K. Keeney, Editors). Cornell Lab of Ornithology, Ithaca, NY, USA. https://doi.org/10.2173/bow.barbro1.02 This would be much better than the webcite. Aircorn (talk) 23:48, 18 July 2021 (UTC)Reply

Alright, I've replaced all of the cites for the BOW article with this one. AryKun (talk) 11:27, 20 July 2021 (UTC)Reply

• Why is the affinis subspecies formatted differently

It's the only one that has a separate common name. This can also be seen in other GA and FA articles (eg White-winged_fairywren). However, if you want me standardize the formatting, I'll do that. AryKun (talk) 13:05, 12 July 2021 (UTC)Reply

• I feel it relies too heavily on birds of the world as a source. Are there not academic books or papers on the bird?

I have added new references for most of the material.

• Saying it inhabits ranges up to 300 metres, but then that it can be found at 900 meters is a contradiction.

Changed it so that it says that it's usual range is up to 300 m, and it can sometimes up found up to 900 m. AryKun (talk) 13:05, 12 July 2021 (UTC)Reply

• Nests are also rarely built fair from water, over roads and paths. I assume you mean far. Not sure whether you are meaning with the comma. Are the rarely built far from over roads or ar the rarely built over roads?

Fixed. AryKun (talk) 13:05, 12 July 2021 (UTC)Reply

• should put non breaking spaces between numbers and units of measurements

I've put all the number ranges in convert templates now, so hopefully that isn't an issue anymore. AryKun (talk) 07:06, 13 July 2021 (UTC)Reply

• It is unlikely to be visually confused with any other bird in the lead. I am not sure this is well enough established in the body

Done. AryKun (talk) 07:06, 13 July 2021 (UTC)Reply

• It can also adapt quite well to disturbed habitat, inhabiting secondary growth and degraded habitat near rivers. I feel this sentence could be clearer (secondary forest growth).

Done. AryKun (talk) 07:06, 13 July 2021 (UTC)Reply

• While nothing major shows on earwig [1], but still not liking the heavy reliance on one website.
  • For example the Vocalisation section is pretty close paraphrasing of the source. (your text in green)

I've reworded the section, also added a couple of new refs. AryKun (talk) 05:48, 13 July 2021 (UTC)Reply

• • • The black-and-red broadbill is much less vocal than other species of Asian broadbills, often remaining silent, and with quieter calls than most other broadbills. In Laos, the most frequently heard call was a series of accelerating parnk notes, similar to the noise made by the wingbeats of a wreathed hornbill. Other vocalizations include a cicada-like grating call, a monotonous repeated tyook, a rasping wiark, churring calls, and melodious whistles. They also make ascending trills, similar to those of the black-and-yellow broadbill, but shorter, slower, softer, and quieter. The alarm call is a series of rapid pip notes. Other vocalizations include a hoarse ka-ka-kraaar-kraaar, a hoarse twanging cow, and puma-like snarls.
  • Compared to the source
    • Notably less vocal than other Asian broadbills, but rather poorly studied.
    • Often silent, with calls quieter than those of most eurylaimids.
    • The most frequently heard call in Laos was an accelerating series of parnk notes, likened to the sound made by the wingbeats of Wreathed Hornbill (Rhyticeros undulatus) (1). Other calls include grating notes as if from a cicada (Cicadidae), which is thought to be given in advertisement, as well as churring calls, melodious whistles, a monotonous repeated tyook, and a rasping wiark (47, 2). Also utters an ascending trill like that of Black-and-yellow Broadbill (Eurylaimus ochromalus) but shorter, much slower, softer, and quieter (2). In alarm, a rapid series of pip notes; in Sarawak, a hoarse, grumbling ka-ka-kraaar-kraaar that falls in pitch (47); in Brunei, a hoarse twanging cow, and a snarl likened to that of cornered puma (Felis concolor).
  • Even worse is the habitat section where It prefers to inhabit lowland forest near rivers and streams, including evergreen and semi-evergreen forest, mixed dipterocarp forest, riverine forest, swamp forest of various types, nipah, and mangroves. It can also be found in plantations near water, including rubber and Albizia, as well as in villages and settlements. is nearly word-for-word from the source

@Aircorn: I've rewritten the habitat section as well. AryKun (talk) 11:27, 20 July 2021 (UTC)Reply

• • See google scholar and google books for more sources that should help with this issue. A major one for a Good Article pass I am afraid
• No stability issues
• Images licensed correctly
• Prose is fine. Could probably be tightened up in some places,

@Aircorn: I've finished up implementing all of your suggestions, so I think the article is good to go, unless you have any more critiques. AryKun (talk) 09:15, 25 July 2021 (UTC)Reply

<My sincere apologies. Thought I would have more time than I do. Just one further question about the subspecies section and I think we will be good to go. Aircorn (talk) 23:45, 2 August 2021 (UTC)Reply

• Okay thanks all. Will pass it now. Aircorn (talk) 19:15, 17 August 2021 (UTC)Reply

@Micromesistius:, the IOC World Bird List shows the black-and-red broadbill as monotypic so far. AryKun (talk) 03:11, 25 August 2021 (UTC)Reply

I noticed that after writing my message, but IUCN/Birdlife are a major source for bird articles in general, so their dissenting view should get a little more visibility in the article. It is kind of strange that the assessment for affinis is just cited, without any comment. Micromesistius (talk) 08:45, 25 August 2021 (UTC)Reply

In the subspecies section for affinis, there is a bit on how it's considered a distinct species by some authorities. AryKun (talk) 10:55, 26 August 2021 (UTC)Reply

Mat Kiyan, I don't see the utility in adding the information about the s[ecies being common in Singapore when Farquhar visited. He visited in the early 1800's, and the broadbill was commonly seen in Singapore for well over a century after that. Additionally, it's not like Farquhar's visit was particularly significant; none of the other sources I've seen refer to it. AryKun (talk) 13:16, 23 November 2022 (UTC)Reply

I see... I was synchronizing some common sources from the Malay version of this same page, that is where the book source mentioning Farquhar comes from. I saw that what the book cited looks like it could add into appropriate parts of the English version too. But, if my additions here makes them become more overstating instead (that I'm not aware of) and that part needs to be cleared, I understand. -- Mat Kiyan (talk) 13:41, 23 November 2022 (UTC)Reply

Not every version of Wikipedia needs to be exactly identical; different language versions could give different levels of emphasis to different points. Also, the Malay article looks very short to me and so I don't see it as a great guide for structuring this article, which has already been through Good article and Featured article reviews. I've reinstated the old version since the addition made the sentence structure somewhat clunky and also unnecessarily emphasized Farquhar's visit. AryKun (talk) 13:58, 23 November 2022 (UTC)Reply

I understand that too. Thank you for taking the time to listen from & advise someone who is new to this type of work like me. 😊 -- Mat Kiyan (talk) 14:16, 23 November 2022 (UTC)Reply