Edge Rewrite
// HTMLRewriter · presentation

This page was redesigned at the edge.

Cloudflare fetched the original article and streamed it through HTMLRewriter to apply an entirely new visual system without rebuilding the source page.

// request.cf · coarse context

A page that knows where it met you.

Only coarse request metadata is shown. This demo does not display or persist visitor IP addresses.

Country
US
Cloudflare location
CMH
Connection
HTTP/2
Language
Not provided

Ray ID: a237b6fb2c3acf33

Jump to content

Talk:Voluta ebraea/GA1

Page contents not supported in other languages.
Add topic
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Latest comment: 1 year ago by Daniel Cavallari in topic Review

GA review

[edit]

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch

Nominator: Daniel Cavallari (talk · contribs) 14:01, 11 April 2025 (UTC)Reply

Reviewer: ZKevinTheCat (talk · contribs) 02:06, 19 April 2025 (UTC)Reply


Beginning the GA review. Good luck. — ZKevinTheCat

Review

[edit]

This is mostly good, I just have two small concers:

The article mentions "The angle of the spire also differs between the sexes". By how much? Please specify.

Added the angle measurements stated in the reference. The fact that they were missing is odd indeed! I've also added the page number. Please verify! Daniel Cavallari (talk) 17:20, 22 April 2025 (UTC)Reply

The taxonomy and etymology section does not really cover everything. For one, only the species etymology is discussed, and the article contains something along the lines of: "The specific name comes directly from the Latin word ebraea, the nominative feminine form of ebraeus, meaning Hebrew, hence the common name, hebrew volute." This sentence is confusing; did the common name derive from the scientific one, or the other way around? This is unclear. Also, the taxonomy of it not really mentioned beyond just the scientific name. Try to include something about its genus, family, etc.

I've added brief information on the family and genus, along with references, to provide a bit more context. I’ve also rewritten the section discussing the Hebrew etymology and the associated speculations. Hopefully it's clearer and more concise now! Daniel Cavallari (talk) 17:46, 22 April 2025 (UTC)Reply

Other than that, this is a pretty solid article. Good work. ZKevinTheCat (talk) 14:43, 19 April 2025 (UTC)Reply

Thank you very much for taking the time to review this nomination, ZKevinTheCat. Looking forward to working through this review with you! Daniel Cavallari (talk) 16:25, 22 April 2025 (UTC)Reply
The taxonomy section is a lot better, thanks. I've also made some edits to the lead and taxonomy section to improve the flow a little. You can change them if you want; it's your GA.
Unless you have any more comments, I'm ready to pass the article. ZKevinTheCat (talk) 19:26, 22 April 2025 (UTC)Reply
Thank you! I yhink that's it. Daniel Cavallari (talk) 01:59, 23 April 2025 (UTC)Reply