Talk:Voluta ebraea
![]() | Voluta ebraea has been listed as one of the Natural sciences good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it. Review: April 22, 2025. (Reviewed version). |
![]() | This article is rated GA-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||
|
GA review
[edit]GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
- This review is transcluded from Talk:Voluta ebraea/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.
Nominator: Daniel Cavallari (talk · contribs) 14:01, 11 April 2025 (UTC)
Reviewer: ZKevinTheCat (talk · contribs) 02:06, 19 April 2025 (UTC)
Beginning the GA review. Good luck.
— ZKevinTheCat
Review
[edit]This is mostly good, I just have two small concers:
The article mentions "The angle of the spire also differs between the sexes". By how much? Please specify.
- Added the angle measurements stated in the reference. The fact that they were missing is odd indeed! I've also added the page number. Please verify! Daniel Cavallari (talk) 17:20, 22 April 2025 (UTC)
The taxonomy and etymology section does not really cover everything. For one, only the species etymology is discussed, and the article contains something along the lines of: "The specific name comes directly from the Latin word ebraea, the nominative feminine form of ebraeus, meaning Hebrew, hence the common name, hebrew volute." This sentence is confusing; did the common name derive from the scientific one, or the other way around? This is unclear. Also, the taxonomy of it not really mentioned beyond just the scientific name. Try to include something about its genus, family, etc.
- I've added brief information on the family and genus, along with references, to provide a bit more context. I’ve also rewritten the section discussing the Hebrew etymology and the associated speculations. Hopefully it's clearer and more concise now! Daniel Cavallari (talk) 17:46, 22 April 2025 (UTC)
Other than that, this is a pretty solid article. Good work. ZKevinTheCat (talk) 14:43, 19 April 2025 (UTC)
- Thank you very much for taking the time to review this nomination, ZKevinTheCat. Looking forward to working through this review with you! Daniel Cavallari (talk) 16:25, 22 April 2025 (UTC)
- The taxonomy section is a lot better, thanks. I've also made some edits to the lead and taxonomy section to improve the flow a little. You can change them if you want; it's your GA.
- Unless you have any more comments, I'm ready to pass the article. ZKevinTheCat (talk) 19:26, 22 April 2025 (UTC)
- Thank you! I yhink that's it. Daniel Cavallari (talk) 01:59, 23 April 2025 (UTC)
Did you know nomination
[edit]
- ... that the Hebrew volute, Voluta ebraea, spawns by laying egg capsules on fan-shaped green algae thalli?
"A total of 40 egg capsules of V. ebraea were found attached to the green calcareous alga Udotia occidentalis A.Gepp and E.S. Gepp (Fig. 1 A and B) in the same place that V. ebraea adults were found (1 to 2 meters depth in sea grass beds off Paracurú beach, Ceará state, Brasil)."
"This species is known to lay egg capsules only on the calcareous green algae Udotea occidentalis (Fig. 1B), "...- Reviewed:
Daniel Cavallari (talk) 13:22, 23 April 2025 (UTC).
Article is new enough and long enough, recently promoted to GA. I've made a small change in the hook ("Hebrew" is always capitalised). All material is cited to what appear to be reliable sources, and I can see no copyvio or BLP concerns: all images have appropriate licenses. The hook is interesting, though I don't think it fully appears in the article: we have
the attachment of V. ebraea capsules to algae, rather than hard substrates like shells, represents a novel ecological observation within the family Volutidae
, but I don't see "fan-shaped green algae thalli" anywhere, or indeed in the quotations pulled from the sources here.QPQ needs to be done.UndercoverClassicist T·C 17:30, 25 April 2025 (UTC)
- @UndercoverClassicist: Actually, this appears to be the nominator's fifth nomination, so he does not require a QPQ. However, it is his last freebie, so his next nomination will need one. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 00:11, 8 May 2025 (UTC)
- Ah yes, well spotted -- it does say so in the template. @Daniel Cavallari: we should therefore we good to go once the hook is in the article (and fully sourced). If it's already there and I'm just missing it, could you point me towards it? UndercoverClassicist T·C 06:29, 8 May 2025 (UTC)
- @UndercoverClassicist:Thank you! I've just added it to the Life cycle section! Daniel Cavallari (talk) 11:48, 8 May 2025 (UTC)
- Ah yes, well spotted -- it does say so in the template. @Daniel Cavallari: we should therefore we good to go once the hook is in the article (and fully sourced). If it's already there and I'm just missing it, could you point me towards it? UndercoverClassicist T·C 06:29, 8 May 2025 (UTC)
- @UndercoverClassicist: Actually, this appears to be the nominator's fifth nomination, so he does not require a QPQ. However, it is his last freebie, so his next nomination will need one. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 00:11, 8 May 2025 (UTC)