Talk:Christmas darter

Christmas darter 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: January 9, 2020. (Reviewed version).

A fact from Christmas darter appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know column on 28 December 2019 (check views). The text of the entry was as follows:

Did you know... that the Christmas darter is considered a priority species by the state of South Carolina, but of least concern by the International Union for Conservation of Nature?

A record of the entry may be seen at Wikipedia:Recent additions/2019/December. The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Christmas darter.

Wikipedia

To-do[edit]

Hi Cwmhiraeth I'd like to expand the biology/ecology section but doesn't seem like much is out there. I'm thinking I'll make a range map though. Do you think we should go ahead and nominate? Or were you planning on working much more? Enwebb (talk) 20:26, 6 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The Christmas darter seems to be little studied. There is rather more information available about the Savannah darter, which is probably very similar to the Christmas darter, but not admissible for the latter's article. The lead wants expanding a bit more and a range map would be good, then we can probably nominate it for GA. Meanwhile, I will nominate it for DYK, and it might appear at Christmas! Cwmhiraeth (talk) 20:41, 6 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Cwmhiraeth, added that range map and a couple sentences to the lead--what do you think now? Enwebb (talk) 17:19, 12 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Enwebb: I have done a little rephrasing and I should think we are ready to go. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 19:22, 12 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

GA Review[edit]

This review is transcluded from Talk:Christmas darter/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: J Milburn (talk · contribs) 19:28, 15 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I enjoyed reading your last darter article, so happy to look at this one, too. Josh Milburn (talk) 19:28, 15 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

drainage is jargon - could we have a link? riffle, too. And peduncle! And lots of jargon in the paragraph about distinguishing features.
- Cwmhiraeth do you want to take a stab at this one? I think you added this content. Enwebb (talk) 14:45, 20 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Done some wikilinking and rephrasing, but the second paragraph of description has to be jargony because it is explaining subtle differences Cwmhiraeth (talk) 19:39, 20 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I hear you, but we need to help readers where possible! What are branchiostegal membranes, and what does it mean for them to be moderately connected? What's a frenum? If those are clarified, I'm happy to drop the issue. Josh Milburn (talk) 22:32, 28 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I've glossed some terms. Enwebb (talk) 01:48, 7 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Inconsistent length between lead and description

Not really. The maximum total length is for the longest fish ever recorded, but the typical length is the size of a more-average specimen. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 19:39, 20 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, you're right, sorry! Josh Milburn (talk) 22:14, 28 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Could you say a little more about what a "priority species" is?
- added. Enwebb (talk) 15:36, 17 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

That's literally it from a first look. Please double-check my edits. The only trickiness so far is the is-it-isn't-it of the "subspecies". Is there a particular authority we could appeal to to "determine" this? I tried to reword in a few places so that we didn't take side on the matter (I didn't touch the cladogram), but I worry that might be problematic if there is an accepted position... Josh Milburn (talk) 20:06, 15 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hm, that's a tricky one. I am not aware of any authoritative fish taxonomy databases.

binotatum as subspecies

IUCN (2013)
The American Darters (2015)

binotatum as species

NCBI (undated)
"Phylogeny and Temporal Diversification of Darters (Percidae: Etheostomatinae)" (2011)

no subspecies

ITIS

I think we should stay intentionally cautious with the phrasing. It seems like there isn't much in general published on this species, so no one has really confirmed or denied the 2011 publication yet. Enwebb (talk) 20:47, 15 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with the cautious approach; I suppose there's an editorial decision to be made about whether we cover the Christmas Eve darter in this article or in a separate one. If you were willing to create a quick article for the Christmas Eve darter (noting that it may be a subspecies, of course) I would have no objection to us not going into details about the Christmas Eve darter here - for example, in not discussing it in the description section. Alternatively, you could add a couple of sentences to this article discussing the appearance of the Christmas Eve darter. (PS: It may be worth incorporating some of what you've identified above into the article to show the extent of the disagreement/confusion.) Josh Milburn (talk) 22:32, 28 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks J Milburn, I've added some content about the conflicting taxonomy (full species, subspecies, or monotypy) and also added some content to the description section with how the two subspecies are differentiated. Thanks for your patience, I know the holidays were a bit hectic for me and I'm sure that applies to many others! Enwebb (talk) 01:48, 7 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, great, I think this is now where it needs to be. I'm promoting. Great working with you! Josh Milburn (talk) 20:48, 9 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]