The following is an archived discussion of a featured list nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured list candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.

The list was promoted by PresN via FACBot (talk) 12:25, 28 September 2023 (UTC) [1].[reply]

List of tapaculos (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

• Featured list candidates/List of tapaculos/archive1

Nominator(s): AryKun (talk) 14:45, 29 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Another bird list, this time the somewhat larger and lot more homogenous family that is the tapaculos. There are technically 65 species recognized by the IOU, but I'd say around 40 of them are clones of each other that no sane person would bother differentiating; taxonomists are not particularly good at avoiding such activities, so here we are. Have at it! AryKun (talk) 14:45, 29 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Comments from SilverTiger

Ooh, another list!

I'm hoping to get through a nice portion of the non-passerines before the end of the year, especially the smaller (<50 species) orders and families.

Nice, you can probably expect me to show up at a fair number of them. I hope this doesn't come across as rude, but are hummingbirds or owls likely to show up soon? --SilverTiger12 (talk) 13:40, 6 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I'm currently trying to do the smaller orders, hummingbirds is really really huge. I'll probably do it at genus level (113 genera) and then also have separate species-level lists for four of the subfamilies (Florisuginae, Phaethornithinae, Lesbiinae [this is definite DYK bait], and Trochilinae). Owls is also probably done best at genus level, and then I don't really know what rank you could have a species-level list at. AryKun (talk) 13:58, 6 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Strigidae and Tytonidae are the next level below Strigiformes, which makes it the natural division for the lists. SilverTiger12 (talk) 14:33, 6 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Strigidae has like 200 species by itself, but does seem to have three subfamilies, so I guess you could makes lists for those. AryKun (talk) 17:45, 6 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I will point out, List of parrots is 402 species and is currently an FL. So lists of several hundred species are definitely possible. But it is ultimately your call. SilverTiger12 (talk) 18:35, 7 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

List of parrots is honestly absurdly long and needs to be split up to be of use. At that length, the reader's eyes are probably going to glaze over a fourth of the way through; any list longer than 150 species is probably too long. AryKun (talk) 18:38, 7 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

It probably could be split along superfamily or family lines, true. But nonetheless I would hesitate to make lists for anything below family level (at least for vertebrates), with few exceptions. Happy editing, SilverTiger12 (talk) 18:48, 7 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I don't really see we shouldn't make lists of families at genus level and then make subfamily lists at species level. Some of the larger passerine families (tanagers, Old World flycatchers, tyrant flycatchers) would be really unwieldy at species level. AryKun (talk) 19:04, 7 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• ...best detected by their vocalizations. and ...are best identified by their vocalizations. - repetition.
  • Changed second instance to "calls"
• Is the plural tapaculos or tapaculo? You seem to use both in the lede.
  • Both are alright I think, changed to "tapaculos" everywhere to be consistent.
• ...with more than 30 species being described from the region. "having been described", or "endemic to that region".
  • Changed to "having been described".
• ...are difficult to differentiate on the basis of appearance and are generally described based on the basis of genetic data...
  • Done.
• Conventions and Classification sections are good.
• "Boa Nova tapaculo" redirects to an article under a different name. Why the difference?
  • Article's at the wrong name, IOC uses Boa Nova on the checklist.
• The rest of the table itself looks fine, although you're right those are a bunch of "small brown birds" that most people including me would not bother to tell apart. Happy editing, SilverTiger12 (talk) 20:24, 31 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • SilverTiger12, I've replied to all of your comments. AryKun (talk) 10:42, 1 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

    Thank you. Support. SilverTiger12 (talk) 13:35, 1 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Since no-one else seems interested:

• Spot checks of sources 3, 22, 44, and 62 match what they're being cited for.
• All citations are to reliable source.
• No copyvio per Earwig (really, I think copyvio in these lists is night impossible)

Therefore, pass source review. --SilverTiger12 (talk) 13:40, 6 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

You'd have to be a really special kind of editor add copyvio into an article with essentially 2 paragraphs of non-boilerplate text. AryKun (talk) 13:49, 6 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

MyCatIsAChonk

Looks like there's very little wrong here, so I wouldn't be surprised to find no issues. MyCatIsAChonk (talk) (not me) (also not me) (still no) 00:01, 15 September 2023 (UTC) Support - Yeah, I got nothing, excellent work. MyCatIsAChonk (talk) (not me) (also not me) (still no) 00:10, 15 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Standard disclaimer: I don't know what I'm doing, and I mostly AGF on sourcing.
• "Tapaculos are ... best detected by their vocalizations. [one sentence] Tapaculos are ... best identified by their calls.": Oops. Should be combined somehow.
  • But neither of those sentences are about their vocalizations, and the vocalizations bits are to emphasize other aspects. In the first one, it's to emphasize their secretiveness and how hard they are to detect, and in the second, it's to emphasize how similar they look and how hard they are to visually differentiate.
• "International Union for Conservation of Nature. [7 sentences] International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN) Red List of Threatened Species": This isn't a mistake, since opinions vary on how many things from the lead can or should be repeated in the text below the lead, and the second sentence is (just) below the lead. But I think "(IUCN)" would work better after the first mention, and then the second mention could be "IUCN Red List of Threatened Species".
  • It's not in the lead, so I don't really see a reason to change it.
• Chestnut-throated huet-huet, Ochre-flanked tapaculo: range doesn't match the map.
  • Fixed; consequence of having a lot of repetitive text copy-pasted.
• Checking the FLC criteria:
• 1. Otherwise, nothing is jumping out at me as a prose problem. There are no sortable columns. I sampled the links in the tables.
• 2. The lead meets WP:LEAD and defines the inclusion criteria.
• 3a. The list has comprehensive items and annotations.
• 3b. The list is well-sourced to reliable sources, and the UPSD tool isn't indicating any actual problems (but this isn't a source review). All relevant retrieval dates are present.
• 3c. The list meets requirements as a stand-alone list, it isn't a content fork, it doesn't largely duplicate another article (that I can find), and it wouldn't fit easily inside another article.
• 4. It is navigable.
• 5. It meets style requirements. At least two images don't have alt text; I stopped checking images at this point.
• 6. It is stable.
• Close enough for a support. Well done. - Dank (push to talk) 19:03, 17 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Promoting. --PresN 01:00, 28 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Closing note: This candidate has been promoted, but there may be a delay in bot processing of the close. Please see WP:FLC/ar, and leave the {{featured list candidates}} template in place on the talk page until the bot goes through.

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.