Talk:Catodontherium
Catodontherium is currently a Biology and medicine good article nominee. Nominated by PrimalMustelid (talk) at 15:12, 8 September 2024 (UTC) An editor has indicated a willingness to review the article in accordance with the good article criteria and will decide whether or not to list it as a good article. Comments are welcome from any editor who has not nominated or contributed significantly to this article. This review will be closed by the first reviewer. To add comments to this review, click discuss review and edit the page. Short description: Extinct genus of Palaeogene artiodactyls |
This article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||
|
A fact from Catodontherium appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know column on 2 March 2024 (check views). The text of the entry was as follows:
|
Did you know nomination
[edit]- The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.
The result was: promoted by AirshipJungleman29 talk 23:52, 24 February 2024 (UTC)
- ... that Catodontherium had a prior genus name that was mistakenly thought to have been used before and therefore was replaced? Source: Classification of Mammals: Above the Species Level, pg. 406 ("'Proposed on the grounds that Catodus is preoccupied by Catodon Linnaeus, 1761. This is not preoccupation, but Catodus was a numen nudum in its earlier publication (1905) so that Catodontherium may be retained' (Simpson, 1945:147)"
- Reviewed:
Created by PrimalMustelid (talk). Self-nominated at 16:16, 2 January 2024 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/Catodontherium; consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.
- Starting Review--Kevmin § 15:33, 9 January 2024 (UTC)
- Article new enough and long enough, though a bit dense for a lay reader at times. no copyvio issues identified and hook source verified. I think we should maybe look at wordmithing of the hook itself so it flows a little better and is a little more concise.--Kevmin § 17:59, 11 January 2024 (UTC)
- Sure, how do you suggest I reword the hook? PrimalMustelid (talk) 20:26, 11 January 2024 (UTC)
- Apologies for the delays in responding. We could go with something along the lines of:
- Alt1... that due to a misunderstanding, Catodontherium was moved from its original genus name?
- --Kevmin § 20:42, 13 January 2024 (UTC)
- Yeah, that sounds good. PrimalMustelid (talk) 04:29, 14 January 2024 (UTC)
- Sure, how do you suggest I reword the hook? PrimalMustelid (talk) 20:26, 11 January 2024 (UTC)
- Okay, we will need another set of eyes to give a verification that the new hook I proposed is acceptable then, The article overall is ready for passing, as it has no copyvio issues. is new enough and long enough, and does not have any notable rules issues.--Kevmin § 18:35, 15 January 2024 (UTC)
- Article says "the genus may have been renamed because of apparent preoccupation of a prior genus name Catodon". If the article equivocates, so should the hook.--Launchballer 18:30, 10 February 2024 (UTC)
- Launchballer Alt1 does that with the verbiage "due to a misunderstanding"--Kevmin § 19:17, 10 February 2024 (UTC)
- Yes, but the article says 'may', while the hook does not.--Launchballer 20:35, 10 February 2024 (UTC)
- @Launchballer @Kevmin I don't wish for this hook to be in stagnation, so I slightly reworded the sentence to comply with the hook. PrimalMustelid (talk) 18:26, 18 February 2024 (UTC)
- I agree with the rewording as it helps match the source material.--Kevmin § 00:19, 20 February 2024 (UTC)
- Good enough for me. Let's roll.--Launchballer 14:20, 20 February 2024 (UTC)
- I agree with the rewording as it helps match the source material.--Kevmin § 00:19, 20 February 2024 (UTC)
- @Launchballer @Kevmin I don't wish for this hook to be in stagnation, so I slightly reworded the sentence to comply with the hook. PrimalMustelid (talk) 18:26, 18 February 2024 (UTC)
- Yes, but the article says 'may', while the hook does not.--Launchballer 20:35, 10 February 2024 (UTC)
GA Review
[edit]GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
- This review is transcluded from Talk:Catodontherium/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.
Nominator: PrimalMustelid (talk · contribs) 15:12, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
Reviewer: SilverTiger12 (talk · contribs) 01:03, 15 November 2024 (UTC)
I will go ahead and take this one. Expect comments soon. SilverTiger12 (talk) 01:03, 15 November 2024 (UTC)
- Great, thanks for starting the review. PrimalMustelid (talk) 01:24, 15 November 2024 (UTC)
- Good article nominees
- Good article nominees on review
- B-Class Palaeontology articles
- Low-importance Palaeontology articles
- B-Class Palaeontology articles of Low-importance
- WikiProject Palaeontology articles
- B-Class mammal articles
- Low-importance mammal articles
- WikiProject Mammals articles
- Wikipedia Did you know articles