Talk:Blue iguana

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Featured articleBlue iguana is a featured article; it (or a previous version of it) has been identified as one of the best articles produced by the Wikipedia community. Even so, if you can update or improve it, please do so.
Main Page trophyThis article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page as Today's featured article on June 23, 2008.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
November 6, 2007Good article nomineeListed
March 20, 2008Peer reviewReviewed
April 1, 2008Featured article candidatePromoted
Current status: Featured article

Possibly 100[edit]

This bit just seems silly.

"The blue iguana is one of the longest-living species of lizard (possibly up to 69 years). The record is 67 years."

A lot of things are possible, but if it has literally never happened with any known specimen, then why not 70? or 71? 75 is good because it's 3/4ths of 100.24.207.232.113 (talk) 06:55, 28 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]


Cleanup[edit]

We need somone in the know to merge diffrnt pieces of material here that have obviously been copied. Chavatshimshon 03:56, 28 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'm working on it! Mike Searson 03:21, 1 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Third paragraph:

"The fossil record indicates that the Blue Iguana was abundant before European colonization..."

Suggest change to:

"The fossil record indicates that the Blue Iguana was abundant at one time..."

Reasoning:

While the original text might be true strictly speaking, I think it could be a logical stretch. I suspect that the fossil record may or may not be a good indication of the species abundance in relatively recent times ... that there is quite a lapse of time between where the fossil record leaves off and European colonization. But, of course, if the fossil record does closely approach European colonization, please disregard. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 204.100.126.254 (talk) 17:29, 23 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Copyedit[edit]

Lead: Because it was semantically awkward, and on the principle that all adverbs are bad, I removed "strongly". I tried "closely", but that's empty cliche. I tried "diligently", but I realized that even I don't know what that means. "Hard" seemed too plain and to go without saying, one would hope. I think it moves more easily unencumbered by a modifier, but the primary editor can have a go if he wants. --Milkbreath 10:40, 25 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Further reading: The citations are raggedy as all hell. If anybody has these books, please fix. --Milkbreath 13:46, 25 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fixed! All refs should be uniform!--Mike - Μολὼν λαβέ; 05:36, 15 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]


"...It prefers rocky, sunlit, open areas in dry forests or near the shore, as females must dig holes in the sand to lay eggs in June and July. Their vegetarian diet includes plants, fruits, and flowers. Their coloration is tan to gray with a bluish cast that is more pronounced during the breeding season, and more so in males..."

The middle clause in the first sentence is non-parellel with the rest of the sentence. If the sentence starts with "It prefers..." then "or near the shore" will need a verb (e.g., "to live," or "to stay" etc).

My suggestion would also be to get rid of "It" as the subject. It doesn't fit with the next few sentences, where all of a sudden the It (Iguana, singular) is replaced with "Their" (plural).

There might also be some confusion as to whether the "females" referred to in the first sentence are the "their" in the next. Is it females who are the vegetarians, or iguanas in general? Maybe the latter, since the "their" seems to be contrasted with the "males."

Lots of grammar issues in the article. These are just meant to be examples.

C d h (talk) 12:22, 23 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It's also been vandalized 35 times the past 12 hours for having the misfortune of being on the mainpage and had a haywire bot screw it up. Thanks for your input.--Mike - Μολὼν λαβέ 12:27, 23 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Passed GA nomination[edit]

GA review (see here for criteria)
  1. It is reasonably well written.
    a (prose): b (MoS):
  2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.
    a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):
  3. It is broad in its coverage.
    a (major aspects): b (focused):
  4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.
    Fair representation without bias:
  5. It is stable.
    No edit wars etc.:
  6. It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate.
    a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
  7. Overall:
    Pass/Fail: The sourcing is to be admired, congratulations! VanTucky Talk 20:02, 8 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Some feedback[edit]

I always like to put scientific name in parentheses rather than comma, as this makes it less confusing if more subordinate clauses (and hence commas) are used. I'll look for other tweaks. Cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 10:28, 16 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

  • climbing in trees... - is this really supposed to be "climbing in trees "? Sounds a bit odd. Cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 11:04, 16 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • At the beginning of the Anatomy and morphology section I was initially confused by the different lengths cited. I would give the total length first and then remark it was made up of the body and tail lengths to minimise confusion. Cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 11:15, 16 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • The male is larger than the female. - I think we need some idea of how much (percentage?) Cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 11:16, 16 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    • I made all these changes. Let me know if you find anymore of my slop that needs a revamp!--Mike - Μολὼν λαβέ 16:05, 16 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
      • OK, I am not sure but it took me a couple of reads to figure out what was happening with the repopulation and where it was coming from. I will have to read it again and figure out if there needs to be any clarification. Looking not too bad though... :) Cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 20:39, 16 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

They are listed as "vegetarian", isn't that more of a human choice in diet rather than what a reptile should be called? Could it be changed to herbivore? NailPuppy (talk) 01:48, 23 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

  • It says herbivore in the article if you go down to the appropriate section, it's listed as vegetarian in the lead. --Mike - Μολὼν λαβέ 01:53, 23 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Reproduction text removed[edit]

This isn't how text is cited, removed here to be examined and fixed:

"A nesting female devotes a lot of time and energy to finding the right spot for her nest chamber. As she digs, she blocks the tunnel behind her with loose soil. She tunnels until she finds exactly the right depth, temperature and humidity for the incubation of her eggs. Once satisfied, she digs out an underground nest chamber, and works the soil into a fine base usually about a foot below the surface. In total darkness she lays anywhere from one, to twenty or more eggs: the older, larger females are able to produce the most."[44] 44. http://www.blueiguana.ky/aboutblue.htm

SandyGeorgia (Talk) 15:58, 23 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Blue iguana. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 15:26, 4 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Blue iguana. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 00:24, 20 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]