898:"It" there certainly refers to the tail, which is the subject of the preceding sentence. If this is unclear, it should be rephrased, but changing "it" to "the tail" would sound awkward in my opinion. The sentence on the coat now immediately follows the one on the tail, which might mitigate the problem.
829:
Let me start out by stating that I am notoriously bad at reviewing things, so take anything I say here with a grain of salt. But you've reviewed some of my requests lately so it's only fair that I give it a shot. First of all, I think this is an excellent article, about as comprehensive as it could
577:
Thanks for your suggestions, which were definitely helpful. I might consider some of the points you brought up as minor, but I think it's important for
Knowledge articles to be stylistically consistent and this is the way to achieve it. I will probably not have too much time to spend on Knowledge for
834:
The taxonomy section goes through the convoluted history of how the animal came to be classified as it is. But a reader who comes to the taxonomy section just to learn what the current classification is has to read through the whole history to get there. It may be better to put the punchline first
684:
No, I did not, and I consider the chance of success for that to be fairly small. It is also important to realize that the best we could get with that would be a better picture of the skull or a close-up of the molars--to my knowledge, no one has ever published a picture of its skin, let alone of the
278:
I might disagree. It is certainly true that
American mammalogists publishing in American journals will only use metric, but similar texts intended for a popular audience do tend to include imperial units for very basic measurements. I think the average American reader should be able to see whether
882:
This paragraph was supposed to be about external characters (plus the gall bladder which didn't fit in anywhere else). I moved the sentence about the coat a few paragraphs up now, so that we get all the readily understandable stuff at the beginning before plunging into the technical aspects of its
871:
The description is very technical, and all the technical deatils are good. But I think the first paragraph should limit itself to a more basic description, and then expand on the details in the 2nd paragraph. The first paragraph does note the size, the color, the sparse hair (or is this just the
595:
The use of "Meanwhile" at the start of the second paragraph of
Taxonomy is confusing - one meaning of meanwhile is "at the same time" but the events described in the first sentence (1926) take place several decades after those of the first paragraph, and the second sentence is almost three decades
781:
Just to be clear, I also am impressed by the article and the current images. My original thought was just that there might be a published photo out there that the author(s) might be willing to release for use here - as already noted, I have had success asking for such permissions and I thought it
894:
I was a little confused by the sentences that say "It is sparsely haireed and dark, and there is no difference in color between the upper and lower sides" and "The coat, which is dense and soft, is yellowish-brown at the sides, but becomes darker dorsally and lighter ventrally". These seemed to
622:
Thanks for clarifying. I think I would either say something like what you said above, or perhaps say something like "Decades would pass before more information on the species was obtained. In 1926, some rodents collected in
Uruguay were (mis)identified by the collector as Holochilus. American
274:
seems to imply that this is not needed for scientific topics such as these. In all mammalogical publications, even when written by
Americans on American species, measurements are only given in the metric system. I would prefer to also do that here, but if there is a strong need to include the
927:
Fair enough, it is in its own paragraph now. It definitely belongs in "Description" rather than "Taxonomy", as the karyotype is one of the physical aspects of the animal that can be described. The karyotype can of course have taxonomic significance, but that goes for all characters.
279:
it is big or small and whether the habitat is hot or cold, dry or wet. Cranial measurements are meaningless in anything but metric, but my personal opinion is that habitat features, weight (when present), head and body (or total length), and tail should show the conversion. --
199:
Thanks for your comments. I placed the taxonomy section at the top because I felt that several points made there are essential for understanding the rest of the article. The template you mention is not generally used for mammals articles including current FAs such as
766:
I don't imagine anyone will have much luck obtaining a picture of a live animal. It looks like AMNH has several specimens in fluid, but I'm not sure that's all that worthwhile anyway. I am personally quite impressed at Ucucha's ability to score the skull diagram.
716:
I assumed since it was Least
Concern that there must be photos of it published somewhere. If there are not, obviously you can't ask permission to use them. I have had fairly good success rates asking for permission to use photos (though it is a fair amount of work).
923:
I wasn't sure why the description of the chromosomes was in the first paragraph of the description. If this belongs in the description section then it may be worth its own short paragraph at the end, although it may go better in the taxonomy section.
487:
The word "and" is preferred to the ampersand except in the case of official names of corporations and other entities. "Bonvicino, C.R., Oliveira, J.A. & D'Andrea, P.S." would be "Bonvicino, C.R., Oliveira, J.A. and D'Andrea, P.S.", for example.
153:
I would like to bring this article up to featured status. I consulted virtually all literature available about it (which ain't much), so there's little if any opportunity for expansion. I would greatly appreciate any comments you may have.
854:
I happen to agree with the final thing you said. This creature's taxonomic history is fairly confusing, and the current organization reflects my attempt to make clear that confused history in a nontechnical environment. Its relations to
619:: "During the time (that something is happening)." However, the fact that you find it confusing is probably a sign that it would be better to phrase it differently; I'm open to suggestions and will try to think of one myself.
266:
template for the conversions because the template spells and abbreviates automatically and does the math. Thus "head and body length averaging 193 mm" would become "head and body length averaging 193 millimetres (7.60 in)".
895:
contradict each other at first, although rereading I think the first sentence only applies to the tail. But then it may be better to say "The tail is sparsely haired..." (I first thought "it" applied to the whole animal).
227:: This is well-written and most interesting. I'm not a scientist, and I can't bring the eyes of a biologist to the reading, but I have some suggestions about Manual of Style issues and other, mostly nitpicky, things.
961:
Also in distribution and ecology, I found it unusual to use 420.000, 360.000 and 30.000 years old, as I am used to seeing comma separators rather than periods. But I assume that the periods are an appropriate usage.
435:
I now added a little more information that I could pull out of the sources. Someone with a better knowledge of
Spanish than me might want to add some more information on the nests (cited in Voss and Carleton, p. 34,
851:- and then go into the details as to how it got there. Admittedly, the lead seems to have some of this information, so my suggestion would just replicate the end of the lead then maybe it is best to leave as is.
439:), but I think that might actually go into too much detail. The sentence currently in the "Natural history" section apparently includes everything that is known about its reproduction or life cycle. A lot more
859:
c.s. have only recently been recognized, and therefore they belong at the end. As you say, this information is already in the lead, just above the start of the taxonomy section; I think that should be enough.
680:
I also wondered if you had tried contacting someone who has published photos of the rat to see if they would be willing to release one or more for use here - perhaps as lower resolution or smaller versions.
598:
Meanwhile, some rodents collected in
Uruguay in 1926 that the collector had identified as Holochilus had been examined by American zoologist Philip Hershkovitz. In his 1955 review of the genus Holochilus,
876:
and the webbed feet, which I think is right, but also includes more technical details like the plantar margins, tufts of hair on digits, which I think make the basic descrpition harder to follow. Also:
343:"The head and body length is 160 to 230 mm (average 193 mm), the tail length is 195 to 255 mm (average 235 mm), and the length of the hindfoot is 58 to 68 mm (average 62 mm)." - More conversions?
1040:
Thanks - it always helps when someone critically rereads an article and gives constructive comments. At the very least, you were the first one who recognized the "Amphibous" typo. ;-)
976:
In
Natural History, I would say "Lund's Amphibious Rat has semiaquatic habits...", which I think is a bit simpler to read than "Lund's Amphibious Rat is seminaquatic in habits..."
426:
I read virtually anything that has ever been written about this species (which ain't much) when writing this article. I will check again to see whether I missed anything, though.
909:
Instead of saying "becomes darker dorsally and lighter ventrally", it may simpler to use similar language to the tail sentence, i.e., the coat becomes darker on the upperparts."
382:"its distribution is generally limited to areas with mean winter temperatures over 12°C" - The convert template will handle temperature conversions too; e.g., 12 °C (54 °F).
979:
It's not a big deal either way, but I subjectively prefer the current wording. If people agree with you that your wording is to be preferred, I'd happily go with that.
126:
236:
Since the lead is to be a summary or abstract of the whole article, it would be good to slip in at least a mention of "Natural history" and "Conservation status".
578:
the next couple of weeks and what I have I'll use to get this one ready for FAC, but after that I'll definitely look whether there are any interesting PRs to do.
562:
I hope these few suggestions prove helpful. If so, please consider reviewing another article, especially one from the PR backlog. That is where I found this one.
171:
746:
My thought was LC animals would be more common and so more likely to be photographed - photos of robins are plentiful, photos of whooping cranes are less so.
122:
76:
737:
Actually, I'm not sure I'd even expect an association between conservation status and photo availability for rodents. But thanks again for your comments.
509:
The dabfinder tool in the toolbox on the upper right of this page finds two wikilinks that go to disambiguation pages rather than their intended targets.
107:
520:, and I'm not quite sure what to do with it, since my sources just talk about "reed" without specifying which species of reed is meant. I might link to
99:
529:
Could you create a map showing the range of these rats? That would give you a second useful image, which might be handy if you take this to FAC.
947:
been substantiated," rather than stating they "cannot be substatiated", unless there is some reason why substantiation will never be possible.
603:
What I intended to say with that was during the same period when other people were busy (or more accurately, were not busy) figuring out what
211:
Actually, I am very happy that I could at least get the skull picture that is now at the top. That's as good as we get for those animals.
1034:
864:
706:
638:
571:
552:
495:
288:
193:
161:
1075:
943:
In the distribution and ecology section, I would say "Records of live specimens from eastern
Argentina and Lagoa Santa, Minas Geraus,
239:
Well, it says from the NH section that it's semiaquatic. I got in a sentence mentioning its nice nests and that it's not threatened.
475:
scientific journals agree. This doesn't seem to be done consistently in our FAs either; I would prefer to leave it non-italicized.
69:
516:) turned out to be unnecessary; I deleted it and rephrased it because it used an unnecessary technical term. The other is to
440:
367:"including two small accessory roots located in between larger anterior and posterior roots" - Tighten by deleting "in"?
170:
Although there is a lot to say about its taxonomy, I'm not convinced that section belongs at the top. The order given by
335:"The coat, which is long, dense, and soft, is yellow-brown in color at the sides... " - Tighten by deleting "in color"?
1058:
1044:
1017:
969:
954:
932:
916:
902:
887:
820:
797:
776:
761:
741:
732:
667:
647:
582:
450:
430:
327:"The forefeet also lacks tufts on the digits and show very long claws... " - "forefeet ... lack" rather than "lacks"?
297:
218:
115:
62:
44:
50:
1001:
is in fact a good swimmer. I am not sure that should be said explicitly in this article, since it is not about
402:
395:
623:
zoologist Philip Hershkovitz examined the samples again for his 1955 review of the genus Holochilus, ..."
92:
987:
Also in Natural History, I am not sure the word "even" in "It is even more specialized for swimming than
359:"The first lower molars has four roots... " - "molar" rather than "molars"? Or "have" rather than "has"?
17:
275:
imperial units, I have no problems with that. I did link "millimeter", though, as required by the MOS.
256:
Generally quantities expressed in metric units are also expressed in imperial units. I like to use the
309:
965:
They are in British English, but this article is supposed to be in American English. I changed it.
787:
751:
722:
696:
657:
628:
567:
548:
189:
1054:
1030:
472:
1041:
1014:
980:
966:
951:
929:
913:
899:
884:
861:
817:
772:
738:
644:
579:
492:
447:
427:
294:
284:
260:
215:
158:
1025:
As I said, take these suggestions with a grain of salt. I hope they help a little though.
177:
A picture would be very desirable; I assume that a free picture is not currently available.
1013:
is better, adding a little bit of information that would be lost without the word "even".
362:
Changed into "molar", which is consistent with usage in the rest of the teeth description.
437:
405:. I don't use the abbreviation later in the article, so I see no point in giving it here.
166:
Nicely written. I am not very familiar with zoology, but here are my comments on format:
214:
Thanks for the reflist suggestion; I hadn't thought of that. It's at three columns now.
872:
tail), the long claws, the fact that the tail is longer than the head and body, unlike
783:
747:
718:
692:
653:
624:
563:
544:
351:"a slight raising of the mandibular bone at the back end of the incicor," - "incisor"?
185:
1069:
271:
180:
When using the short footnote format like this, they look better with 3 or 4 columns.
394:... - Perhaps this should be spelled out as well as abbreviated on first use, thus:
1050:
1026:
835:- i.e., its family, tribe, etc., its close relatives, shared characteristics among
517:
768:
280:
205:
201:
612:
543:
I must have gone momentarily blind. Yes, it's already there, plain as day.
521:
513:
391:
912:
Good, that helps eliminate a few unnecessary technical words. Done.
1005:. The current wording of the sentence makes clear that even though
591:
I agree that this is generally well done, but had two suggestions.
423:
Is anything more known about its life cycle? Reproductive habits?
782:
worth a shot. SInce there are no such images, the point is moot.
643:
I rephrased it now. What do you think of the current phrasing?
245:
532:
Actually, it is there already (at the bottom of the taxobox).
991:
is" is necessary, since the article never establishes that
141:
134:
103:
607:
was, other people were in the process of discovering
293:Fair enough, I will do it. Thanks for weighing in.
390:"The oldest locality, at Bajo San José, dates to
417:Is it known what preys on Lund's Amphibious Rat?
446:, which is probably similar in many respects.
172:Knowledge:WikiProject Animals/Article template
70:
8:
354:Shame on me for not catching that one. Done.
150:This peer review discussion has been closed.
1049:You're welcome. Glad I could be of help!
77:
63:
32:
35:
420:Is it known how long these rats live?
308:"its external morphology" - Wikilink
7:
469:. takes italics because it's Latin.
24:
995:is an especially good swimmer.
652:That seems fine to me, thanks.
26:
1:
1059:02:09, 28 October 2009 (UTC)
1045:23:17, 27 October 2009 (UTC)
1035:01:53, 27 October 2009 (UTC)
1018:23:17, 27 October 2009 (UTC)
970:23:17, 27 October 2009 (UTC)
955:23:17, 27 October 2009 (UTC)
933:23:17, 27 October 2009 (UTC)
917:23:17, 27 October 2009 (UTC)
903:23:17, 27 October 2009 (UTC)
888:23:17, 27 October 2009 (UTC)
865:23:17, 27 October 2009 (UTC)
821:00:42, 20 October 2009 (UTC)
798:11:34, 21 October 2009 (UTC)
777:17:09, 20 October 2009 (UTC)
762:16:04, 20 October 2009 (UTC)
742:15:39, 20 October 2009 (UTC)
733:14:22, 20 October 2009 (UTC)
707:00:30, 20 October 2009 (UTC)
668:16:04, 20 October 2009 (UTC)
648:15:39, 20 October 2009 (UTC)
639:14:22, 20 October 2009 (UTC)
611:, which I think agrees with
583:00:13, 20 October 2009 (UTC)
572:23:23, 19 October 2009 (UTC)
553:17:57, 20 October 2009 (UTC)
496:00:13, 20 October 2009 (UTC)
451:02:08, 20 October 2009 (UTC)
431:00:13, 20 October 2009 (UTC)
298:00:42, 20 October 2009 (UTC)
289:00:31, 20 October 2009 (UTC)
219:15:38, 18 October 2009 (UTC)
194:14:57, 18 October 2009 (UTC)
162:12:26, 11 October 2009 (UTC)
1092:
883:feet. How does that read?
816:Thanks for your comments!
1076:October 2009 peer reviews
830:be. My suggestions are:
403:Marine Isotopic Stage 11
396:Marine Isotopic Stage 11
377:Distribution and ecology
272:WP:MOS#Unit conversions
174:makes more sense to me.
950:Gooid point. Changed.
28:Lund's Amphibious Rat
18:Knowledge:Peer review
615:first definition of
444:Holochilus sciureus
589:Ruhrfisch comments
225:Finetooth comments
1009:is already good,
794:
758:
729:
703:
691:Hope this helps,
664:
635:
142:Watch peer review
87:
86:
1083:
827:Rlendog comments
792:
756:
727:
701:
662:
633:
596:after th first.
482:Literature cited
265:
259:
139:
130:
111:
79:
72:
65:
47:
33:
1091:
1090:
1086:
1085:
1084:
1082:
1081:
1080:
1066:
1065:
874:H. brasiliensis
791:
755:
726:
700:
661:
632:
442:is known about
412:Natural history
401:I made it just
263:
257:
145:
120:
97:
91:
83:
51:Manual of Style
43:
31:
22:
21:
20:
12:
11:
5:
1089:
1087:
1079:
1078:
1068:
1067:
1064:
1063:
1062:
1061:
1023:
1022:
1021:
1020:
985:
984:
983:
974:
973:
972:
959:
958:
957:
940:
939:
938:
937:
936:
935:
921:
920:
919:
907:
906:
905:
892:
891:
890:
869:
868:
867:
824:
823:
813:
812:
811:
810:
809:
808:
807:
806:
805:
804:
803:
802:
801:
800:
788:
752:
723:
697:
689:
688:
687:
686:
678:
677:
676:
675:
674:
673:
672:
671:
670:
658:
629:
586:
585:
560:
559:
558:
557:
556:
555:
536:
535:
534:
533:
527:
526:
525:
501:
500:
499:
498:
479:
478:
477:
476:
458:
457:
456:
455:
454:
453:
421:
418:
409:
408:
407:
406:
388:
387:
386:
374:
373:
372:
371:
365:
364:
363:
357:
356:
355:
349:
348:
347:
346:Same as above.
341:
340:
339:
333:
332:
331:
319:
318:
317:
316:
306:
305:
304:
303:
302:
301:
300:
254:
253:
252:
242:
241:
240:
222:
221:
212:
209:
182:
181:
178:
175:
152:
147:
146:
144:
90:
85:
84:
82:
81:
74:
67:
59:
56:
55:
54:
53:
48:
38:
37:
30:
25:
23:
15:
14:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
1088:
1077:
1074:
1073:
1071:
1060:
1056:
1052:
1048:
1047:
1046:
1043:
1039:
1038:
1037:
1036:
1032:
1028:
1019:
1016:
1012:
1008:
1004:
1000:
997:
996:
994:
990:
986:
982:
978:
977:
975:
971:
968:
964:
963:
960:
956:
953:
949:
948:
946:
942:
941:
934:
931:
926:
925:
922:
918:
915:
911:
910:
908:
904:
901:
897:
896:
893:
889:
886:
881:
880:
879:
878:
875:
870:
866:
863:
858:
853:
852:
850:
846:
845:Pseudoryzomys
842:
838:
833:
832:
831:
828:
822:
819:
815:
814:
799:
796:
795:
785:
780:
779:
778:
774:
770:
765:
764:
763:
760:
759:
749:
745:
744:
743:
740:
736:
735:
734:
731:
730:
720:
715:
714:
713:
712:
711:
710:
709:
708:
705:
704:
694:
683:
682:
679:
669:
666:
665:
655:
651:
650:
649:
646:
642:
641:
640:
637:
636:
626:
621:
620:
618:
614:
610:
606:
602:
601:
600:
594:
593:
592:
590:
584:
581:
576:
575:
574:
573:
569:
565:
554:
550:
546:
542:
541:
540:
539:
538:
537:
531:
530:
528:
523:
519:
515:
511:
510:
508:
507:
506:
505:
497:
494:
490:
489:
486:
485:
484:
483:
474:
471:
470:
468:
465:
464:
463:
462:
452:
449:
445:
441:
438:
434:
433:
432:
429:
425:
424:
422:
419:
416:
415:
414:
413:
404:
400:
399:
397:
393:
389:
384:
383:
381:
380:
379:
378:
369:
368:
366:
361:
360:
358:
353:
352:
350:
345:
344:
342:
337:
336:
334:
329:
328:
326:
325:
324:
323:
314:
313:
311:
307:
299:
296:
292:
291:
290:
286:
282:
277:
276:
273:
269:
268:
262:
255:
250:
249:
247:
243:
238:
237:
235:
234:
233:
232:
228:
226:
220:
217:
213:
210:
207:
203:
198:
197:
196:
195:
191:
187:
179:
176:
173:
169:
168:
167:
164:
163:
160:
155:
151:
143:
138:
137:
133:
128:
124:
119:
118:
114:
109:
105:
101:
96:
95:
89:
88:
80:
75:
73:
68:
66:
61:
60:
58:
57:
52:
49:
46:
45:Copying check
42:
41:
40:
39:
34:
29:
19:
1024:
1010:
1006:
1002:
998:
992:
988:
944:
873:
856:
849:Carletonomys
848:
844:
840:
836:
826:
825:
786:
750:
721:
695:
690:
685:live animal.
656:
627:
616:
613:Wiktionary's
608:
604:
597:
588:
587:
561:
503:
502:
481:
480:
466:
460:
459:
443:
411:
410:
376:
375:
321:
320:
230:
229:
224:
223:
183:
165:
156:
149:
148:
135:
131:
117:Article talk
116:
112:
93:
27:
385:Same again.
322:Description
206:Giant Otter
202:Sperm Whale
104:visual edit
1003:Holochilus
999:Holochilus
993:Holochilus
989:Holochilus
857:Holochilus
841:Holochilus
461:References
398:(MIS 11)?
310:morphology
790:<: -->
784:Ruhrfisch
754:<: -->
748:Ruhrfisch
725:<: -->
719:Ruhrfisch
699:<: -->
693:Ruhrfisch
660:<: -->
654:Ruhrfisch
631:<: -->
625:Ruhrfisch
617:meanwhile
564:Finetooth
545:Finetooth
244:Wikilink
1070:Category
945:have not
837:Lundomys
524:instead.
522:reed bed
512:One (to
157:Thanks,
1051:Rlendog
1027:Rlendog
605:molitor
514:rostrum
504:General
473:Not all
261:convert
186:Yannick
127:history
108:history
94:Article
36:Toolbox
1042:Ucucha
1015:Ucucha
981:Ucucha
967:Ucucha
952:Ucucha
930:Ucucha
914:Ucucha
900:Ucucha
885:Ucucha
862:Ucucha
818:Ucucha
769:Aranae
739:Ucucha
645:Ucucha
609:magnus
580:Ucucha
493:Ucucha
491:Done.
448:Ucucha
428:Ucucha
392:MIS 11
295:Ucucha
281:Aranae
270:Well,
246:pelage
216:Ucucha
159:Ucucha
789:: -->
753:: -->
724:: -->
698:: -->
659:: -->
630:: -->
467:et al
370:Done.
338:Done.
330:Done.
315:Done.
251:Done.
136:Watch
16:<
1055:talk
1031:talk
847:and
773:talk
568:talk
549:talk
518:reed
285:talk
231:Lead
204:and
190:talk
123:edit
100:edit
599:...
1072::
1057:)
1033:)
1011:L.
1007:H.
843:,
839:,
775:)
767:--
570:)
551:)
312:?
287:)
264:}}
258:{{
248:?
192:)
184:--
140:•
125:|
106:|
102:|
1053:(
1029:(
793:°
771:(
757:°
728:°
702:°
663:°
634:°
566:(
547:(
283:(
208:.
188:(
132:·
129:)
121:(
113:·
110:)
98:(
78:e
71:t
64:v
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.