Talk:Tehuantepec jackrabbit/GA1

GA review

Passed. Generalissima (talk) (it/she) 20:08, 13 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

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

Nominator: Reconrabbit (talk · contribs) 21:12, 27 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Reviewer: Generalissima (talk · contribs) 00:43, 13 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

so called free thinkers when they see bunny

Istmo de Tehuantepec Region might be confused with the much larger Isthmus of Tehuantepec in general; I'd just say "eastern Oaxaca" for those less aware of Mexican political geography.
A check list of mammals of the North American continent, the West Indies and the neighboring seas - should be rendered in title case, but I think is too long of a title to include verbatim. Maybe just "his 1905 mammal checklist"? Also, why are "Mexico" and "San Mateo del Mar, Tehuantepec" in quotes?
To combat SEAOFBLUE and also just give context, may be better to introduce Elliot as a zoologist (could also be a smart idea on the two prior mentioned naturalists)
native grasses (genera Bouteloua and Paspalum) nitpicky, but I think this would be slightly more clear if it said "of the genera Bouteloua and Paspalum"; otherwise, one could think that the grass genera are restricted to the region.
Unsure if the list of other native mammals in its range is really necessary - also, "coexist" could be read as peacefully' coexisting, which the coyotes and foxes certainly aren't, as far as the rabbit is concerned.
Might be good to link "Sympatric" somewhere
Linked in its first appearance (Distribution and habitat)
Since Santa María del Mar gets referenced twice, it might be good to indicate where it is relative to the rest of the population in terms of cardinal direction, just for some context.
shores of a salt water lagoon connected to the Gulf of Tehuantepec two actually, and they have names - Laguna Inferior [es] and Laguna Superior [es] (this is given on the IUCN red list source)

Sources:

Sydney Anderson's name is given twice in Anderson & Gaunt, 1962. Additionally, its citation is formatted like a book, when it should be formatted like a journal (see American Museum Novitates); so it needs journal name and ISSN, and likely can ditch the OCLC and publisher.
Johann Christian Daniel Schreber's name was also listed twice. A consequence of using Citoid I guess. Fixed that.
Book titles should be consistently capitalized with eachother, as should journal article titles; so Elliot 1905 should be put in title case.
Be consistent about wikilinking publishers or not.
Be consistent on whether ISBNs are spelled without dashes or with dashes.
Mammalian Species is the only journal to have its publisher given. this probably isn't necessary.
It seems you want to link journals with the IUCN Red List link; if so, you should link Western North American Naturalist and Mammalian Species
Probably better to give the full name (El Colegio de la Frontera Sur) for ECOSUR cite

Spot check:

IUCN red list checks out, but there's a lot you could include from it still
- It consists of four isolated populations, in Montecillo Santa Cruz, San Francisco del Mar Pueblo Viejo, Aguachil and Santa María del Mar
- Its historic range was estimated at around 5,000 km2, before this was cleared for agriculture
- (Strangely, seems to contradict Schai-Braun & Hackländer 2016 and says it doesn't go above 500 meters in altitude)
Álvarez-Castañeda 2024 checks out
Lorenzo et al 2018 checks out
Lorenzo et al 2011 checks out (though I just realized this one has a weirdly formatted date; you should remove the April 30 for consistency)
Hoffman 2005 checks out

@Reconrabbit: That's all! Generalissima (talk) (it/she) 01:00, 13 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Will address most of these after I get some rest but the most current source, Álvarez-Castañeda 2024, states that there are only 3 populations, not 4? Recon rabbit 01:49, 13 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

interesting, i missed that - does it give locations for these? maybe one has gone extinct (on mobile now, so cant check atm) Generalissima (talk) (it/she) 02:53, 13 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

From page 531 of the source: "No congeneric species of Lepus are sympatric with L. flavigularis. It is found only in the eastern grasslands of Oaxaca and the extreme west of Chiapas (Map 8). It is now considered extirpated from Chiapas, leaving its main colonies around Laguna Inferior and Superior, Oaxaca." Recon rabbit 14:42, 13 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I have not responded to every item individually here but tried to address them within the past few edits to the article. Recon rabbit 18:59, 13 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

This all looks good to me! Generalissima (talk) (it/she) 20:08, 13 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.