Wikipedia:Peer review/Short-beaked Echidna/archive1

Short-beaked Echidna

I'd like to get some feedback on the readability of this article. I'm planning to add a diargam of the muscles that control the tounge, is there anything else that could be expanded on or clarified?--nixie 09:01, 6 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

The readability looks good. I fixed several typos and spelling errors and converted some words from British English to American English. 'Cultural references' section is only one sentence, have you considered merging this with another section or expanding this? Are there no external links that would be appropriate to add? That's all I can think of at the moment, it would be nice to see this featured.— Wackymacs 09:25, 6 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sure there are more cultural references, but I just can't think of them now. I'll have a look for some more ex links, but I have used most of the good ones as references.--nixie 09:30, 6 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Knuckles the Echidna? —Bunchofgrapes (talk) 16:21, 6 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Knuckles is mentioned on the echidna page, since I can't be sure if it was based on this particular species I wasn't sure how to include it.--nixie 22:12, 6 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Right you are. I was, um, just testing you, yeah.... that's the ticket. ;-) —Bunchofgrapes (talk) 03:28, 7 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I have made a few fixes for readability, consistency and redirects. There's very little to do with the article; it is fantastic as is. I would like to see cultural references expanded if at all possible, and maybe the second paragraph of the introduction. Also, you might like to break up the third paragraph of "Physical description". Thanks for making this another brilliant and feature-standard article on an Australian critter. --cj | talk 12:32, 6 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I've added all the cultural things that I could think of, the section is a decent length now. If you can think of anything else please add it.--nixie 04:12, 7 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Nope. I think this article can procede to FAC straight away. Great work.--cj | talk 04:16, 7 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

It's pretty informative, although it should also have American measurements as well. I have converted the measurements that I know for sure. Does it have any links to the long-necked echidna (Zaglossus bartoni)? Also, expand the cultural references. Going great, guys. I can't wait when Wikipedians come to the Australian fauna featured article. They might help expand the echidna article.

Bibliomaniac15 01:33, 7 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Your taxonomy is slightly off, I'd added some more information on the three Zaglossus species to the taxonomy section.--nixie 04:12, 7 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I put in a 5c piece picture, and cropped the rock art one to show the symbol clearer (hope I got the right one) Astrokey44 23:16, 7 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- Thanks for the pic, and you did choose the right animal in the rock art- other groups have art that looks more obviously echidna like- but we (Wikipedia) don't have images of them.--nixie 23:31, 7 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]