Talk:Carcinosoma

Carcinosoma has been listed as one of the Natural sciences good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.
Review: September 19, 2018. (Reviewed version).

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Carcinosoma article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Arthropods Low‑importance

	Arthropods portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Arthropods, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of arthropods 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.ArthropodsWikipedia:WikiProject ArthropodsTemplate:WikiProject ArthropodsArthropods 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.

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Carcinosoma/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Dunkleosteus77 (talk · contribs) 19:00, 14 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by Dunkleosteus77

What's a prosomal appendage? User:Dunkleosteus77 |push to talk 19:00, 14 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

An appendage attached to the prosoma, added explanation. Ichthyovenator (talk) 20:42, 15 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

How big's Jaekelopterus? User:Dunkleosteus77 |push to talk 19:00, 14 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Added. Ichthyovenator (talk) 20:42, 15 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

You got a parentheses inside a parentheses, and for {{convert}}, you're gonna wanna have the parameters |adj=on and |sp=us in this instance so it reads "2.5 meter" User:Dunkleosteus77 |push to talk 21:14, 15 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Removed paranthesis and added parameters. Ichthyovenator (talk) 09:32, 16 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

After you get above 12 inches, start using feet User:Dunkleosteus77 |push to talk 19:00, 14 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Got it, fixed. Ichthyovenator (talk) 20:42, 15 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note in the future, Greek language and Ancient Greek are very different User:Dunkleosteus77 |push to talk 19:00, 14 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Of course, should have linked Ancient Greek. Ichthyovenator (talk) 20:42, 15 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Is this paraphyletic? User:Dunkleosteus77 |push to talk 19:00, 14 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, but no source specifically states that "Carcinosoma is paraphyletic". Is it okay to state that "it was recovered as paraphyletic" anyway? Ichthyovenator (talk) 20:42, 15 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

If they say or imply it with different words it should be fine User:Dunkleosteus77 |push to talk 21:14, 15 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

It's not commented on at all in the study. Ichthyovenator (talk) 09:32, 16 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I wouldn’t put it down then, I guess it’s clear enough in the cladogram that there’s something going on here User:Dunkleosteus77 |push to talk 15:30, 16 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

ref no. 16 is not formatted right User:Dunkleosteus77 |push to talk 19:00, 14 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Fixed. Ichthyovenator (talk) 09:32, 16 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Something wrong with the formatting of ref no. 2 User:Dunkleosteus77 |push to talk 19:00, 14 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Formatting here based on how formatting was done for ref no. 5 in Spinosaurus as that is also specifically to the supplementary information of a paper. Ichthyovenator (talk) 09:32, 16 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Formatting of ref no. 5 is inconsistent

like the last name is in caps and somehow a different font size, you use “P34,” and I can’t tell if this is supposed to be a book or not User:Dunkleosteus77 |push to talk 15:30, 16 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Replaced source altogether, its information was repeated in the next source where it is cited in the description and added a new source where it was used in "classification". Ichthyovenator (talk) 09:12, 17 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

For ref no. 8, use {{GBIF}} User:Dunkleosteus77 |push to talk 19:00, 14 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Done. Ichthyovenator (talk) 09:25, 17 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

ref no. 12 isn't formatted correctly User:Dunkleosteus77 |push to talk 19:00, 14 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

it’s just missing a publisher and an ISBN (if it has one), and the author’s first and last name aren’t separated by a comma User:Dunkleosteus77 |push to talk 15:30, 16 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Fixed, also added the publisher. Ichthyovenator (talk) 09:12, 17 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

File:Carcinosoma Size 2.svg, File:Adelophthalmus irinae.png, and File:Carcinosoma newlini telson.png need source lines to verify they're accurate User:Dunkleosteus77 |push to talk 19:02, 14 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I'll add sources, shouldn't be hard as the sources were used for the text as well. I assume this goes for all size diagrams and reconstructions (e.g. other eurypterids too)? Ichthyovenator (talk) 09:32, 16 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Replaced File:Adelophthalmus irinae.png pending the addition of a source, added sources to the other two images. Ichthyovenator (talk) 09:12, 17 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I see this article uses American English so for all the {{convert}}, you have to add |sp=us because the template defaults to British English User:Dunkleosteus77 |push to talk 21:14, 15 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Done. Ichthyovenator (talk) 09:32, 16 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

the doi for ref no. 2 isn’t linking. You should probably just use {{cite}} for all the refs to get rid of the little syntax problems, or, in this particular instance, you can use {{doi}} to get it to link User:Dunkleosteus77 |push to talk 15:30, 16 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Used the doi template. Ichthyovenator (talk) 09:27, 17 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

the page number is just the doi without punctuation, the PMID isn’t linking, and you need a PMC 2865068 which’d make the url redundant and unnecessary. You can either use {{cite journal}} and fill out the parameters or {{PMID}} and {{PMC}} User:Dunkleosteus77 |push to talk 13:41, 17 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Used {{cite journal}}. Ichthyovenator (talk) 19:19, 17 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

wait, so if a ref has a PMID and PMC, then you need to add those in replacement of the url. I think you can do in this case <ref>{{cite journal|parameters}} [url Supplementary Information]</ref> You also might want to check your other 4 journal refs for PMID and PMC numbers User:Dunkleosteus77 |push to talk 01:57, 18 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

but that won’t stop it from passing, so I guess I’ll just go on ahead and close it. You still might wanna do that though User:Dunkleosteus77 |push to talk 21:24, 19 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! I've added the PMID back and added the PMC but I do not see why I'd need to replace the url? Sure it links to the same thing but I doubt most readers are familiar with that "PMC" or "PMID" means and just clicking on the title is in that case much more intuitive. I tried looking, but I do not know how to find the PMID and PMC numbers, if there are any, for the other journal refs. Ichthyovenator (talk) 21:35, 19 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The template should automatically link to the page if there’s a PMC so it’s as if there is a |url parameter (it still hyperlinks the title), which makes the |url parameter redundant. To find PMC and PMID, just go to https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov and search the title. If nothing comes up, it doesn’t have a PMID or a PMC User:Dunkleosteus77 |push to talk 00:26, 20 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]