Talk:Sitatunga

Sitatunga 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: February 11, 2016. (Reviewed version).

A fact from Sitatunga appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know column on 4 March 2016 (check views). The text of the entry was as follows:

Did you know... that the ears of the sitatunga (pictured) are so specialized that they can pinpoint the direction of the origin of a sound?

A record of the entry may be seen at Wikipedia:Recent additions/2016/March. The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Sitatunga.

Wikipedia

Mammals Low‑importance

	Mammals portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Mammals, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of mammal-related subjects on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.MammalsWikipedia:WikiProject MammalsTemplate:WikiProject Mammalsmammal articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Africa: Angola / Botswana / Namibia / Tanzania Mid‑importance

	Africa portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Africa, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Africa on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.AfricaWikipedia:WikiProject AfricaTemplate:WikiProject AfricaAfrica articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Angola (assessed as Low-importance).
	Botswana portal This article is supported by WikiProject Botswana (assessed as Low-importance).
	This article is supported by WikiProject Namibia (assessed as Low-importance).
	Tanzania portal This article is supported by WikiProject Tanzania (assessed as Low-importance).

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Cwmhiraeth (talk · contribs) 14:04, 7 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I propose to take on this review. My first impression of the article is good and I will make a detailed reading shortly. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 14:04, 7 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks a lot. Sainsf <^>_{Talk all words} 17:52, 7 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

First reading

The sentence that starts "However, according to Article 50.1.1 ..." is confusing, and I am unsure what "that" refers to.

Fixed

"Hence, Speke was recognised as the correct authority" - if that is the case, why does the article give Sclater as the authority?

Fixed

You mention the "kéwel" and later the "bushbuck" and most people won't know these are the same. Perhaps it would be best to stick to one, and perhaps you could give the scientific name of each animal the first time they are mentioned and wikilink them.

Done

Is the nyala the same as the mountain nyala?

No. They are two different species.

What does the tribe Strepsicerotini consist of?

Added.

"However, these factors might not be much reliable" --> "However, these factors may not be reliable".

Done.

Having stated "There is a chevron between the eyes of the males", it is unclear whether the rest of the paragraph refers to males only or to both sexes.

Fixed

"...and allows the animal to have an advantage over slimy and muddy vegetation." - There's an unwanted "and" here, and I'm not sure what you mean by having an advantage.

Fixed

The last paragraph of the Description section states several facts that would fit better in other parts of the section.

Do you refer to the parts on sexual dimorphism and glands? A few suggestions would help.

The paragraph gives the impression of some facts you had forgotten to mention so you tacked them on at the end. The horns are so fundamental that I would include them in the first paragraph. The pasterns and hooves could go in paragraph 3 where you are talking about the hooves, and I'm not sure about the scent glands. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 18:41, 9 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Done. I put the glands in with the coat description; that is what I generally do. Sainsf <^>_{Talk all words} 10:10, 11 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The image caption "Sitatunga submerged in water" does not agree with the description of the animal submerged in water.

Fixed

The word "Saiwa" appears in the Diet section, and needs some explanation, unless you put the Distribution section before the Ecology and behaviour section, as I usually do.

Fixed

"The rutting male approaches the male in a lower bending posture," - I think you mean approaches the female.

Oh, what a blooper!

"The calf takes time to master the specialised gait of the sitatunga, and as a result keeps falling inside the water." - I don't understand this.

As the specialised gait of the sitatunga enables it to walk in water and prevents it from falling into it entirely. Should I try to clarify this a bit in the article?

Yes. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 18:41, 9 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Done. Sainsf <^>_{Talk all words} 10:10, 11 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

"Males, and even some females, have been observed to leave their herds even before reaching sexual maturity due to intrasexual competition." - This seems curious because earlier the article says that the animal is mainly solitary.

Fixed. Larger groups may also be formed.

Your list of countries where the sitatunga occurs is in alphabetical order, but would be better if the countries were more logically arranged.

Could you please suggest what can be a logical arrangement? I am in a habit of putting them alphabetically in all my articles, so this is a new idea to me.

I'll leave it to your discretion, but I start at one end of the range and work my way towards the other. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 18:41, 9 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I see. There could be no order more logical. However, your method is a bit difficult here, because if you see the political map of Africa then you will realise that there can be no exact "end"s of the range - it is a weird shape and the order can not be very clear. Still, a rough order would be : Senegal, Gambia, Guinea-Bissau, Guinea, Ghana, Benin, Nigeria, Chad, Cameroon ,Equatorial Guinea, Gabon, Central African Republic, South Sudan, The Democratic Republic of the Congo, Angola, Namibia, Botswana, Zambia, Zimbabwe Mozambique, Burundi, Rwanda, Tanzania, Kenya, Uganda (from western Africa into southern Africa to eastern Africa). Should I add it? Sainsf <^>_{Talk all words} 10:10, 11 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Looking back now at the lead, I think it makes a good job of summarising the rest of the article. Well done!

Thanks!

There are a number of places where I think the phraseology awkward but I propose to do a bit of copyediting when you have dealt with the points I mention above.

Sure; I have responded to all the points above. Sainsf <^>_{Talk all words} 18:13, 9 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Cwmhiraeth (talk) 19:22, 7 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Just a heads up, at Talk:Dibatag/GA1 I found several instances of close paraphrasing and almost identical wording to the source cited. Thought I'd mention it so that could be checked here too. Thanks! delldot ∇. 00:34, 8 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Cwmhiraeth, delldot Thanks to you both for your comments, I shall soon reply to them all. Delldot is right; given my close but, honestly, unintentional tendency to paraphrase, I will go through as many articles I have improved to check for such copyright issues. Please give me a few days, I am a bit busy but I believe the task would have been done by the end of this week or only a bit more.(that is for all those articles, the two presently nominated shall be dealt with first). I won't repeat this folly in my future works. Sainsf <^>_{Talk all words} 09:56, 8 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

That's OK. No rush. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 10:00, 8 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I have addressed all the points raised, and have dealt with both possible and apparent instances of paraphrasing in this article. Sainsf <^>_{Talk all words} 18:13, 9 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

GA criteria

The article is well written and complies with MOS guidelines on prose and grammar, structure and layout.
The article uses many reliable third-party sources, and makes frequent citations to them. I do not believe it contains original research.
The article covers the main aspects of the subject and remains focussed.
The article is neutral.
The article is stable.
The images are relevant, have suitable captions and are properly licensed.

Final assessment - I believe this article reaches the GA criteria. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 10:48, 11 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you! I have looked closely at your copyedits, got a lot to learn from them. Sainsf <^>_{Talk all words} 10:54, 11 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Assessment comment

The comment(s) below were originally left at Talk:Sitatunga/Comments, and are posted here for posterity. Following several discussions in past years, these subpages are now deprecated. The comments may be irrelevant or outdated; if so, please feel free to remove this section.

Sorry, but two pictures seem to show us bushbucks which live in semiarid areas.

Sitatunga are very rare and shy and live in moore and reeds. Recently we saw some in Okavango Delta. Our guides were very excited to find them. They looked more long haired and grey and different from bushbuck and waterbuck. We have made pictures of an female and a male one.

Thomas Foerg

Germany

Last edited at 09:21, 9 June 2009 (UTC). Substituted at 06:18, 30 April 2016 (UTC)

Etymology lacking

Basic information to add to this article (which anyone reading this article might expect to find here): the origin/etymology of the word "sitatunga." Is it Swahili? 173.88.246.138 (talk) 22:52, 17 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]