Talk:Paleomerus

Paleomerus 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 27, 2018. (Reviewed version).

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:Paleomerus/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Dunkleosteus77 (talk · contribs) 01:26, 20 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by Dunkleosteus77

"It has been found in deposits from the Cambrian age (Atdabanian epoch) of Sweden and Poland," an age in geology is very different from a period, and later you say which species was found in Sweden and Poland, so you don't have to say here, "Sweden and Poland" User:Dunkleosteus77 |push to talk 01:26, 20 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Both done. Super Ψ Dro 22:13, 20 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

~~Greek language is very different from Ancient Greek~~ User:Dunkleosteus77 |push to talk 01:26, 20 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I'll remember that for next time. Changed link.

Did you make the size comparisons with Arthropleura and Jaekelopterus because they were all contemporaneous? You should probably say, "Many contemporaneous other arthropods reached much greater lengths," or, "Many other arthropods of the time reached much greater lengths" User:Dunkleosteus77 |push to talk 01:26, 20 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

No, they lived in different periods. Should I add that Arthropleura and Jaekelopterus were not contemporaneous with it or mention other Cambrian arthropods?

Sorry, I glanced at Arthropleura and read it as Anomalocaris, but why exactly are those two used for comparison? User:Dunkleosteus77 |push to talk 01:39, 21 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

To show how great the arthropods can become. Super Ψ Dro 15:27, 21 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I think it would make more sense to compare it to the arthropods of the time. You wouldn’t say a Komodo dragon is a small reptile in comparison to a T. rex User:Dunkleosteus77 |push to talk 16:33, 21 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I will search more about this. Super Ψ Dro 09:24, 22 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Added Anomalocaris. Super Ψ Dro 10:51, 23 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Now when you say, “Strabops thacheri exceeded this...” it sounds like you’re comparing Strabops to Anomalocaris User:Dunkleosteus77 |push to talk 21:28, 23 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I rewrote the sentence. Super Ψ Dro 22:14, 23 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

~~The first paragraph of the Description section is missing a citation~~ User:Dunkleosteus77 |push to talk 01:26, 20 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Added.

”making Paleomerus the median genus of the Strabopida order,” doesn’t have a ref and you could just say earlier that Paleomerus is average sized for the order or something along the lines User:Dunkleosteus77 |push to talk 21:28, 23 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I used the reference that determines the size of P. hamiltoni. I do not know where to put the "average sized". Super Ψ Dro 22:14, 23 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The ref doesn’t work considering it’s from 1957 and Parapaleomerus was discovered in 1999, and I don’t think it’s entirely necessary to say that it’s the median genus User:Dunkleosteus77 |push to talk 03:13, 24 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sorry for the delay I'm causing. I have specified that Parapaleomerus was the smallest strabopid. It's okay like that now? Super Ψ Dro 21:11, 24 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

If P. makowskii is 7 cm, how is Parapaleomerus the smallest of the family at 9 cm? User:Dunkleosteus77 |push to talk 21:38, 24 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

It was the smallest genus since P. hamiltoni surpassed Parapaleomerus. Super Ψ Dro 08:33, 25 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Is that what the source said? User:Dunkleosteus77 |push to talk 13:33, 25 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

No... Super Ψ Dro 21:23, 26 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Then you probably shouldn’t keep it because I feel that’s not how this size thing works User:Dunkleosteus77 |push to talk 21:40, 26 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I have rewritten the sentence so that the size of other strabopids is still mentioned. Super Ψ Dro 19:44, 27 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Instead of saying, "Paleomerus is the most diverse strabopid genus, with two species described, one more than the rest of the strabopids," you could say, "Paleomerus has two species described, more than the rest of the strabopids," or something a little more concise User:Dunkleosteus77 |push to talk 02:10, 21 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Replaced.

~~I don't think you need to wikilink ethnicities~~ User:Dunkleosteus77 |push to talk 02:10, 21 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Links removed.

~~"being the left eye the only preserved," I think it should be, "the left eye being the only preserved"~~ User:Dunkleosteus77 |push to talk 02:10, 21 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Replaced.

"although the most accepted classification at the moment is that of aglaspidid-like arthropods," most accepted compared to what? User:Dunkleosteus77 |push to talk 02:10, 21 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

To the interpretation of strabopids as real aglaspidids. Should I say this in the text?

I don’t know what that means. Like Strabopidae is the most valid taxon in the class Aglaspidida? User:Dunkleosteus77 |push to talk 16:33, 21 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Or Strabopodiae is synonymous with Aglaspidida? User:Dunkleosteus77 |push to talk 17:26, 21 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

No, that Strabopidae is a family within the Aglaspidida order, therefore leaving Strabopida invalid. Super Ψ Dro 09:24, 22 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Okay you should probably say something like that User:Dunkleosteus77 |push to talk 12:54, 22 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

It's okay like that? Super Ψ Dro 10:51, 23 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

You might wanna specify after the comma that you’re still talking about Strabopidae, but you don’t have to User:Dunkleosteus77 |push to talk 21:28, 23 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

~~When you list how Paleomerus is like other strabopids, you probably shouldn't separate the items with periods~~ User:Dunkleosteus77 |push to talk 02:10, 21 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Done, I think.

And that's about it User:Dunkleosteus77 |push to talk 02:10, 21 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Alright, looks good now User:Dunkleosteus77 |push to talk 19:45, 27 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you very much for the review! Super Ψ Dro 20:29, 27 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]