Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Monticolomys/archive1

The following is an archived discussion of a featured article nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured article candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.

The article was promoted by Laser brain 16:55, 8 February 2011 [1].

---

Monticolomys

Monticolomys (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

• Featured article candidates/Monticolomys/archive1

Nominator(s): Ucucha 01:00, 22 January 2011 (UTC)

In 1929, someone caught a nondescript little brown mouse on Madagascar, which landed in a museum full of nondescript little rodents. However, this particular little brown mouse turned out to be unknown to science, and in the 1990s it was found to be widespread and locally common in the mountains of Madagascar. It is the subject of this article, which was improved by J Milburn's GA review and I hope will now be found to meet the FA criteria. Ucucha 01:00, 22 January 2011 (UTC)

Comments - sources look okay, links checked out with the link checker tool. I ran the article through Coren's tool and Earwig's tool and nothing showed up in regards to plagiarism with those tools. (Wow, it's a mouse! Where's the mushroom and the lemur???) Ealdgyth - Talk 15:20, 22 January 2011 (UTC)

There isn't much I can add to my GA review- the article is well written and researched. I note it's quite short; we don't need to repeat the previous discussion about "how comprehensive is comprehensive", but I do have some thoughts.

• Again, I note the rather odd situation of the title being the genus, but the opening words being the species. I don't know what the solution is, but I don't think the way it is now is perfect.
  • Reworded.
• Is it safe to call them herbivorous?
  • Probably (though frugivorous and graminivorous are more precise terms), but I don't see much of a need; I think it's better to just say what they eat than to attempt to apply some label.
• Any idea how long they live/more on the reproduction? I note you mention how large the litters are, but not much else.
  • None at all. That the litter size is apparently known greatly surprised me.
• I'm assuming there's no difference between male and female morphology other than the obvious? If not, perhaps make that clear?
  • Rodents tend not to have much sexual dimorphism, but there is nothing in the sources explicitly discussing that in this species, so I don't think there is much to include.
• You mention captivity; where/why?
  • As part of a study in Andringitra. They apparently tested wild-caught captive animals for their dietary preferences. Do you think anything else needs to go into the article?
    • Potentially a note to add to the conservation status section that they have been kept in capitivity for some time/note that they were released (if they were)? I'm not sure; I'm just trying to think of things someone may reasonably ask about the species. J Milburn (talk) 23:10, 23 January 2011 (UTC)
      • The source does not say anything about the period they were kept in captivity. Ucucha 23:20, 23 January 2011 (UTC)

Dunno how much you'll be able to answer, but hopefully some good will come of it. J Milburn (talk) 17:44, 23 January 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for the review! Ucucha 18:48, 23 January 2011 (UTC)

Disambig/External Link check - no dabs or dead external links. --PresN 22:00, 25 January 2011 (UTC)

Support: Couldn't find anything wrong with this one. A nice short article about a Malagasy rodent. The only thing I want to know is whether or not you tried contacting Carleton about a photo? (I know Goodman doesn't respond to email, so I won't ask about him.) – VisionHolder « talk » 23:09, 31 January 2011 (UTC)

No, but I have unsuccessfully contacted Dr. Carleton on other occasions before. Thanks for the review, Ucucha 00:11, 1 February 2011 (UTC)

• Here is an image copyright check by Stifle.
• There is only one image, which has an acceptable free license. Stifle (talk) 14:12, 3 February 2011 (UTC)
• Support Comments reading through now - I'll jot queries below: Casliber (talk · contribs) 06:46, 5 February 2011 (UTC)

Monticolomys is a genus of rodents within the subfamily Nesomyinae,... - strikes me as odd to define it by subfamily rather than family, any reason for this?

Thanks. Nesomyinae is a far older taxon than the family it is placed in (which was only established in 2004), so I think it's more significant. However, I've added the family to the lead sentence; this agrees with most of my rice rat articles (e.g., Transandinomys). Ucucha 13:20, 5 February 2011 (UTC)

in montane eastern Madagascar.. - would any meaning be lost by saying " in the highlands of eastern Madagascar"? The meaning of montane is pretty obvious but it isn't used in lay English all that much.

I just removed it, as a previous sentence in the lead already mentioned the range. Ucucha 14:26, 5 February 2011 (UTC)

ok. Casliber (talk · contribs) 14:28, 5 February 2011 (UTC)

:An example of Monticolomys koopmani was captured.. "example" reminds me of maths equations, why not "specimen"?

and it not sharply demarcated from the upperparts. - um, something missing here "is"?

Both fixed. Ucucha 15:04, 5 February 2011 (UTC)

otherwise looking good. Casliber (talk · contribs) 14:52, 5 February 2011 (UTC)

Support with nitpicks from a non-scientist:

Thanks for the review! Ucucha 16:33, 5 February 2011 (UTC)

• "M. koopmani is dark brown above and dark gray below" - stupid question, but above and below what?
  • Upper- and underparts; clarified. Ucucha 16:33, 5 February 2011 (UTC)
• "they never published their results" - the previous sentence says only that they recognized it as a new species, not that they studied it; maybe change "results" to "findings" (or similar)?
  • How could they have recognized it as a new species without studying it? I don't see how "results" and "findings" are not synonyms in this context. Ucucha 16:33, 5 February 2011 (UTC)
• "Monticolomys, however, does not follow this pattern" - it's not entirely clear what the "pattern" is; is it that it's not part of those 7 genera?
  • The other genera are all quite distinct from each other; Monticolomys, on the other hand, is fairly similar to Macrotarsomys.
• What are "cover hairs"? What's a "liana"?
  • Cover hairs are the main fur, in contrast to the longer guard hairs which extend above the cover hairs. I linked liana.
• "lacks many indentations and protuberances" - do you mean simply that it has few indentations and protuberances, or that it lacks the indentations and protuberances of other Malagasy rodents or similar animals?
  • Both, but the latter is the more important point.
• Where is Ankaratra? Does it have a wiki-article that we could link to? What about Andringitra?
  • Both linked.
• "Monticolomys was found at 1875 m (6151.6 ft) altitude" - grammar
  • Is that not correct? I changed it anyway. Ucucha 16:33, 5 February 2011 (UTC)
• Literature cited entry for Goodman et al 2010? Is this the IUCN entry? If so, Goodman's part of that is dated 2008
  • Corrected.
• Be consistent in whether multi-editor works are marked "ed." or "eds."
  • Fixed.
• Is the 1996 collaboration correctly Goodman and Carleton or Carleton and Goodman?
  • The latter; fixed.
• Musser and Carleton are in which volume of Wilson and Reeder? Nikkimaria (talk) 16:21, 5 February 2011 (UTC)
  • Volume 2, but since the page numbering is continuous across the two volumes, it doesn't seem necessary to add that (the volume is not mentioned in the numerous other featured articles that cite Wilson and Reeder [2005]). Ucucha 16:33, 5 February 2011 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.