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

The article was promoted 17:31, 25 May 2007.

---

This article is the first collaboration of wikiproject birds. I feel it fulfils all criteria and is about as comprehensive as one can get before getting into real trivia. The sources are cited and reliable and the article has not been the subject of any edit wars. it has hierarchical headings and has been copyedited by at least 3 of us (and we'll try to address concerns FA reviewers may have!). cheers, Cas Liber | talk | contribs 03:56, 20 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Support - as a sometime contributor to the article. Sabine's Sunbird talk 04:02, 20 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Support (needless to say) as nominator Cas Liber | talk | contribs 04:06, 20 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

*Support as another contributor Kla'quot 04:10, 20 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Changing to Conditional Support. The article is in excellent shape. However, Circeus brought up some things which I think still need to be addressed:
  • "The neck and breast are distinctly brownish but obscured by glossy black when the plumage is very fresh." - needs to be clarified.  Done hope that's okcheers, Cas Liber | talk | contribs 08:26, 21 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Pied Raven paragraph is unsourced. (Partly done. One reference but it predates its extinction so needless to say cannot refer to the whole paragraph)cheers, Cas Liber | talk | contribs 01:56, 21 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • "However, the male may 'cover' the young without brooding them as such." - needs to be more explicit  Donecheers, Cas Liber | talk | contribs 23:16, 20 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Conservation and management section fails to cover properly the ways in which the species is controlled when it becomes a pest.

Kla'quot 19:28, 20 May 2007 (UTC) Got one for 3 ways in Mojave. Gotta run but there should be some others for elsewhere in the world. Got another for Finland though it is historical n cheers, Cas Liber | talk | contribs 02:07, 21 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment - I am bothered by the fact that some paragraphs end without a reference. Even if the last sentence is actually covered by a reference in the next paragraph, it appears unreferenced. Some examples include the first paragraph of "evolutionary history", the first of "description", the third of "distribution and habitat", and the first and second of "breeding". Please make it clear where the information in these paragraphs is coming from.--Danaman5 05:53, 20 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I was a little worried about the article appearing over-referenced with a zillion inline thingies but will see what can be done.cheers, Cas Liber | talk | contribs 13:09, 20 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

That appears to only be of concern if dozens of sentences cite repeatedly cite the same source. I don't see that being an issue here. -- Phoenix2 ^{(talk, review)} 16:08, 20 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

OK no problem, working on it. cheers, Cas Liber | talk | contribs 04:55, 21 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

There's no need for every sentence to be supported by an inline citation... Christopher Parham (talk) 05:50, 21 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Question? Do I have the right bird, or is it only the American Crow? Crows in our area were wiped out by West Nile Virus — we don't have them anymore. Does West Nile affect the Common Raven, and should that be mentioned? SandyGeorgia (Talk) 16:19, 20 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • American Crows are the species hardest-hit by the West Nile Virus. Infected Common Ravens have been found, but according to this source by the National Audubon Society apparently it is not one of the more commonly infected species. Kla'quot 16:45, 20 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Support. Comprehensive and nicely written. Axl 20:19, 21 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Support Thorough coverage with an appropriate level of detail. A good read. I feel the "Cultural references" section is a little choppy but not strongly enough to object. Yomangani^talk 01:52, 23 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the support, when you say "choppy" do you mean too many brief examples and should be expanded? It was tricky but I tried formatting the paras so that there was a theme to each (ancient, celtic-medieval-british, modern...) cheers, Cas Liber | talk | contribs 02:39, 23 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I really only have a problem with the last paragraph. I've edited out some of the awkward redundant phrasing but there are some remaining:

• The Common Raven's appearances in literature mirror those of traditional mythology and folklore In what way? tweaked
• perhaps most famously Yes, perhaps, or arguably, or perhaps arguably or perhaps, some would say, arguably, legend has it.
• Modern literature too has seen ravens in the works of Charles Dickens and Stephen King, among others I think you need a bit more of a list here or I start to think "I bet they can't find any others", or maybe you want to say something like "in works by authors as diverse as Charles Dickens and Stephen King" (although you are then into the "how diverse are they?" argument).  Done
• ...in Bhutan, (how?) the Yukon territory,(how?) and on the Isle of Man (how?)  Done
• Finally it has been adopted by a sporting entity Finally? (were we waiting for it to happen?), adopted? (do they have a little cage for it?), sporting entity? (is that a team?).  Done

Like I said, nothing that ruins an overall good piece, but it is a shame to finish with a paragraph full of clunky phrasing and weasel words. Yomangani^talk 16:09, 23 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Support As a lover of corvids and minor contributor. Corvus coronoides Contributions_{MGo Blue} 15:22, 26 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured article candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.