Talk:Macroscytus australis

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

Nominator: AxonsArachnida (talk · contribs) 07:14, 14 January 2026 (UTC)

Reviewer: Alexeyevitch (talk · contribs) 01:26, 4 June 2026 (UTC)

Hi. I'll review this article. I'd appreciate if you could provide access to Hickman (1978). Alexeyevitch^(talk) 01:26, 4 June 2026 (UTC)

Thanks @Alexeyevitch, I've sent an email with a link to the paper. AxonsArachnida (talk) 01:56, 4 June 2026 (UTC)

Got it! Review should be finished this evening. I'll ping you when I'm done.Alexeyevitch^(talk) 02:11, 4 June 2026 (UTC)

@AxonsArachnida:. Alexeyevitch^(talk) 08:26, 4 June 2026 (UTC)

Thanks @Alexeyevitch, I've made all the changes listed. AxonsArachnida (talk) 08:50, 4 June 2026 (UTC)

k. passing now. Alexeyevitch^(talk) 09:20, 4 June 2026 (UTC)

More information Rate, Attribute ...

Rate	Attribute	Review Comment
1. Well-written:
	1a. the prose is clear, concise, and understandable to an appropriately broad audience; spelling and grammar are correct.	Macroscytus australis are a species of [...] - I think is a species is correct Fixed They are known to feed on grass seeds such as those from Poa annua. → They are known to feed on grass seeds, including those of Poa annua. I went with your wording As adults - comma Added M. australis were first described - pretty sure "was first described" is the most common phrasing in such bits Added [...] from Tasmania specimens → from specimens collected in Tasmania Good idea M. australis are [...] - should be is Done Tasmania, Western Australia, Queensland, Brisbane and New South Wales - Brisbane is a city in Queensland, so I think "Brisbane" can be removed Removed "Central Otago" should be capitalised and probably linked Linked Also, 'south to' might be better than 'down to' Added Adults are recorded occurring throughout the year →Adults occur throughout the year - less wordy That works for me There is unnecessary whitespace after [...] they may also hide at the bases of plants on screes Removed
	1b. it complies with the Manual of Style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation.	synonymized → synonymised (MOS:ENGVAR) Fixed replace "didn't" with "did not" (MOS:CONTRACTION) Removed (including random other contraction I found)
2. Verifiable with no original research, as shown by a source spot-check:
	2a. it contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline.	Reference layout is satisfactory
	2b. reliable sources are cited inline. All content that could reasonably be challenged, except for plot summaries and that which summarizes cited content elsewhere in the article, must be cited no later than the end of the paragraph (or line if the content is not in prose).	References are reliable. No issues here.
	2c. it contains no original research.	Everything is sourced [1] check [2] check [3] check [4] check [5] check [7] check [9] check [10] check
	2d. it contains no copyright violations or plagiarism.	Nothing of concern
3. Broad in its coverage:
	3a. it addresses the main aspects of the topic.	Yes
	3b. it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style).	Yes
	4. Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each.	No issues
	5. Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute.	Article is stable with no ongoing edit wars.
6. Illustrated, if possible, by media such as images, video, or audio:
	6a. media are tagged with their copyright statuses, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content.	File:Macroscytus australis, Tāwharanui Peninsula, Rodney, Auckland, North Island, New Zealand imported from iNaturalist photo 248867376.jpg CC BY Y
	6b. media are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions.	Yes
	7. Overall assessment.

Close