Talk:Campylocephalus/GA1

GA Review

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch

Reviewer: Super Ψ Dro 22:56, 10 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I have always liked this eurypterid due to its bizarre shape and the fact of being the last one to survive, so why not review it? I'll try to take a look to the article between Tuesday and Friday. Super Ψ Dro 22:56, 10 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Or maybe Saturday... Super Ψ Dro 09:30, 15 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

However, I have a point for now. There is a cladogram representing Campylocephalus oculatus as the sister taxon of a clade formed by Hibbertopterus and Cyrtoctenus in this paper, it would be good to add it to the article.

Well I'll be damned. I've added the cladogram. Ichthyovenator (talk) 07:39, 11 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Just saw this had begun, and noticed that the links above go to Necrogammarus for some reason, just so you're aware. Maybe they can be changed to Campylocephalus manually. FunkMonk (talk) 17:58, 11 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I'm sorry, I literally copied and pasted the base of the review of Necrogammarus here. Super Ψ Dro 18:11, 11 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, that shouldn't be necessary, though, since all that text and linking is generated automatically. FunkMonk (talk) 18:12, 11 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

"family of eurypterids" Probably "eurypterids" should be linked here.

Yes, of course. Linked. Ichthyovenator (talk) 11:35, 15 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Explain "subsemicircular".

Done. Ichthyovenator (talk) 11:35, 15 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Do we know anything about its telson?

I don't think we have the telson. C. oculatus is a carapace and some segments, C. salmi is two fragmentary carapaces and C. permianus is another carapace. Ichthyovenator (talk) 11:35, 15 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I am not sure if it is necessary to cite the ICZN, but that depends on you.

Waterston (1958) specifically mentioned it conflicting with "opinion 65" so I figured that it would be worthwile to include what opinion 65 is. Ichthyovenator (talk) 11:35, 15 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Sure then. Super Ψ Dro 12:47, 15 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Remove the explanation of "thoracic segments" in the history of research and move it to the description.

Done. Ichthyovenator (talk) 11:35, 15 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Link Tarsopterella.

Linked. Ichthyovenator (talk) 11:35, 15 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

"named as a species of the related Hibbertopterus" I think that with the previous paragraph it is clear that Hibbertopterus and Campylocephalus are related forms.

Sure, removed "the related". Ichthyovenator (talk) 11:44, 15 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

You could state that both genera were classified in Hibbertopteridae in 1959.

Done. Ichthyovenator (talk) 11:44, 15 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I would merge the last two paragraphs in the history of research, but it is not necessary.

Merged them. Ichthyovenator (talk) 11:44, 15 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

You could mention some characteristics that united the hibbertopterids in the classification.

Added. Ichthyovenator (talk) 07:40, 20 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Is it correct to place a semicolon before presenting the cladogram?

I don't think it's necessarily wrong but it might be better to just go with punctuation, changed to that. Ichthyovenator (talk) 11:44, 15 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I see an absence of links of some technical terms (like appendage, compound eye...). Maybe you want to revise the article again.

Linked both appendage and compound eye, were there any more that I missed? Ichthyovenator (talk) 11:44, 15 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Those two were the most important. I would also link exoskeleton, segment, specific name, preoccupied (name), concave and convex, family, type species, genus, dorsal and ventral, phylogenetic, synonym, spine, superfamily, suborder, order, arachnid and footprint, as well as Scotland. Obviously it's not necessary to link all these words, but you could select some. Super Ψ Dro 12:47, 15 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Linked the ones I considered important. Ichthyovenator (talk) 13:06, 16 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

And it would be nice to try to find something about the name Campylognathus, but it will not affect the review if you don't get anything. I think it's mentioned somewhere in Wikisource, but it's not very useful.

I did find a mention in Wikisource in what looks to be the original description of it (it's by Diener) but it doesn't look like he mentions anything useful such as his reasoning behind changing the name or anything relating to that at all, I could have a second look in a bit but I'm unsure if there's much to gain from adding anything from it. Ichthyovenator (talk) 07:46, 20 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Ok then, if you find something you can add it and I'll take a look. Super Ψ Dro 13:25, 20 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I have nothing more to add, the article is pretty good. I'll pass it once the points above are addressed. Super Ψ Dro 09:30, 15 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Passing now, I don't find any other problem. Congrats! And out of curiosity, will you work on the rest of the hibbertopterids? Super Ψ Dro 13:25, 20 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the review! I'm slowly working on Vernonopterus and hoping to tackle Hibbertopterus, so hopefully I'll be doing the others too, yes :) Ichthyovenator (talk) 13:47, 20 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]