Talk:Capromeryx

Mammals Low‑importance

	Mammals portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Mammals, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of mammal-related subjects on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.MammalsWikipedia:WikiProject MammalsTemplate:WikiProject Mammalsmammal articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Palaeontology Low‑importance

	Paleontology portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Palaeontology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of palaeontology-related topics and create a standardized, informative, comprehensive and easy-to-use resource on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PalaeontologyWikipedia:WikiProject PalaeontologyTemplate:WikiProject PalaeontologyPalaeontology articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Feedback on Final Draft

- Can you be more precise than "about 5 million years ago?" E.g., "...from x to y years ago" or "until y years ago." Changed-TJ

- I would change "The only extant indirect relative remaining in this family is the North American Pronghorn" to something like "Its closest living relative, and the only surviving member of its family, is the North American Pronghorn." (Or something similar -- "indirect relative" is kind of subjective). ***Changed -TJ

- I would edit the tense to past tense, e.g., "Capromeryx were..." ***Adjusted

- Change "coned in shape" to "conical in shape" or "cone-shaped." ***Changed -TJ

- "Tar pits especially have been a common place to find Capromeryx fossils, mostly juveniles" is a bit passive. Suggest rewriting as:

"Most Capromeryx fossils have been found in tar pits, and juveniles are especially common." Or something similar (make sure it's a correct statement -- I don't want to introduce errors in my edits!). ***Reworded and clarified-TJ

- Take "full size skeleton sample" should just be "full skeleton." ***Changed -TJ

- Link to the page for the La Brea Tar Pits. ***Changed- TJ

- In the first sentence under "Classification," instead of "these animals," just spell out Capromeryx again (since it's a new paragraph). ***Changed-TJ

- The statement about horn cores needs a reference, and I would also add "(the bony inner shaft of the horn)" after "horn cores." ***Changed-TJ

- Under "Discovery" you say the first fossils are from 3 million years ago, but in the beginning you introduce them as living 5 million years ago. I would fix that. ***Changed -TJ

- Substitute "researchers" for "individuals" -- it could be unclear if you're talking about individual fossils at a quick glance.

- Under extinction, you mention that they declined in diversity around the Miocene. I would clarify whether you mean the genus or the family. ***Changed-TJ

Do we have any information at all about its habitat or diet? ***Addressed

Really nice work with this!

IceAgeDoc (talk) 19:45, 2 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Feedback on Article Draft

Hi, team Capromeryx! Here are some comments on what you've done so far:

Quick correction: 5 million years ago was the Pliocene, so make sure you correct this. Also, it would be good to show the range of when the species shows up.

Add a reference for the tar pits statement.

Avoid phrases like "we know," which aren't in the encyclopedic style. As an alternative, you can just take that out and "they began to decline around the Miocene."

Suggestions for further edits: Do we know anything about their diets or ecology? How about their evolution?

This is coming together nicely! Send me an email when you're ready for some close edits.

IceAgeDoc (talk)

Choosing an Article

Nice work with this so far -- you've got a good handle on headings, etc. Try your hand at subheadings -- I recommend using a heading for a unique assignment, and subheadings for sections within that (e.g., "areas to improve"). In theory, you should have 2-3 suggestions for a possible topic. I would recommend checking out the Talk page of your proposed page, too. Be careful with species -- there is often not enough information to make a full page. Definitely check out the available literature before you commit to a species-level page. One possibility is to create a page for the genus, and collect several species together. This was suggested for one of the giant beaver pages -- it might be a good idea to check out some similar taxa and see what others have done. Let me know what you decide! IceAgeDoc (talk) 01:33, 2 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Merge with Capromeryx minor

Yes I agree. Apparently C. minor may not even be a valid species. The dwarf pronghorn should perhaps have its own section in the Capromeryx article since it is notable for its size and being a near-Holocene extinction. Porqaz (talk) 19:15, 11 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Support as nominator I'm usually lenient about having Late Pleistocene species within genera as separate articles, but in this case there simply isn't enough detail in either article to justify a split. Hemiauchenia (talk) 19:22, 11 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Merger complete. Klbrain (talk) 09:19, 25 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]