Wikipedia:Peer review/Xerocole/archive1

Xerocole

This peer review discussion has been closed.
I've listed this article for peer review because I've recently rewritten the whole article, and want to know what I can do to further improve it.

Thanks, Prof. Squirrel (talk) 22:49, 14 December 2012 (UTC)

• It's a good rewrite, making the article enjoyable and informative. I did want to know more about mechanisms, and perhaps examples beyond the high school textbook - there is a bit of a biology lesson about it at the moment. Would suggest therefore two directions for improvement: a) add some more advanced texts and scientific review-of-the-field papers to the bibliography (which is very short...), and trawl them for detail on the key mechanisms; b) consider drawing a diagram or two of the mechanisms, not too much like Roberts, e.g. to compare Camel and Horse nephrons (or Gerbil and Mouse). Since you have quite a few 'easier' texts already, why not subsection the bibliography into 'Research texts', 'General reading', 'Children's' (or something along those lines)? There are plenty of colorful and informative books for children as young as 4 on desert beasts. Better include the intended reading age! And a few more photos would go down well too. Finally, on anti-predator defence, Camouflage came to mind - feel free to lift some material on countershading (Oryx...) and flattened and fringed desert animals (horned lizards...). I've done a quick CE of the article. Comments by Chiswick Chap (talk) 21:20, 24 December 2012 (UTC)

PS. A 'History' section on pioneering research and natural history of the subject would be welcome too.