Talk:Telopea truncata/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: J Milburn (talk · contribs) 10:12, 31 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Happy to offer a review. Josh Milburn (talk) 10:12, 31 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

"James Ross gave it the name Telopea tasmaniana in his Hobart Town Almanack in 1835.[2]" It's a little jarring to leave this "unchallenged"- readers may wonder about the "status" of this name.

Ah yes. Fixed now as obviously is a synonym and added and linked Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 10:04, 1 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

"It is the earliest offshoot of a lineage that gives rise to the Gippsland waratah (T. oreades) and Monga waratah (T. mongaensis) of southeastern mainland Australia.[5] The perianths" Several things could do with being linked, here?

Whoops...linked now Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 10:07, 1 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

"The genus is classified in the subtribe Embothriinae of the Proteaceae, along with the tree waratahs (Alloxylon) from eastern Australia and New Caledonia, and Oreocallis and the Chilean firetree (Embothrium coccineum) from South America." A bit clumsy

trimmed a little, but I think it is an important point to include Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 10:18, 1 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Is Triporopollenites ambiguus worth linking? Don't be scared of redlinking!

redlinked yes. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 13:11, 31 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

"Unlike the more familiar New South Wales waratah" What do you mean by this?

I expanded a little to clarify - hopefully sufficiently. Does it make sense? Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 10:18, 1 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

"Obovate to spathulate in shape, they have entire (smooth) slightly downcurved (recurved) margins.[2] The undersurface of the leaves is hairy. Occasional lobed leaves are seen." A bit jargony. "raceme", too.

ok - trimmed a bit and linked. Baffled as to how I can describe 'obovate' in less than several words though, and musing on 'smooth' vs 'straight' leaf margin... Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 00:23, 3 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

"though sporadic yellow-flowered plants occur" It's unclear what "sporadic" means in this context. It can probably be removed, as it's specified in the next sentence.

It means scattered - i.e. they just pop up here and there among the usual red-flowered plants, not in any particular locale, so it's like a chance mutation or something. Changed to 'scattered' as I think it is an important note to make Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 00:23, 3 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

"These were described as forma lutea but have no taxonomic status, as they appear sporadically and are mere colour variations" This is a bit jargony (specifically, "forma" and "taxonomic status")

trimmed as was a bit repetitive. better? Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 00:23, 3 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The second half of the second paragraph of the description section could probably be smoothed out a little

It's a hard one - gone away and come back and looked at it a couple of times, but am unsure what to do next. Agree it could be massaged more though Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 02:24, 4 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Nothofagus gunnii redirects to a different name. Also, what's "short" rainforest?

this is fiddly as the species has been recently classified in a new genus, but as far as I know the name of the forest community hasn't changed. Just made a redirect for the time being. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 13:11, 31 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

"which is fed on by many species" Species of what? Also, should that be upon?

bird. was worried that it was too repetitive as I thought it was implied by previous sentence, but agree is ambiguous so added in. 'upon' added. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 00:23, 3 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

In the ecology section, you could perhaps merge the first and last paragraphs and merge the middle two.

done. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 00:23, 3 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The sources look mostly fine- I'm not going to quibble about formatting/consistency. The pictures are excellent. Josh Milburn (talk) 11:30, 31 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

my daughter now has a boyfriend in Tasmania, so have taken her down there a couple of times recently....and snuck off and done a few walks and taken some nice photos, and dumped on commons. You are welcome to look at the images and let me know which are the best/most educational/visual etc. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 00:27, 3 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The pictures in the article at the moment are good- as a general comment, I would say that pictures of the full plants (not just close up of the flowers) would be nice to include, but this one has some (though, admittedly, smaller ones). In any case, I'm happy to promote at this time. Great work! Josh Milburn (talk) 14:47, 7 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

thx! Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 19:40, 7 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]