Talk:Trapalcotherium/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Casliber (talk · contribs) 11:30, 13 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, I'll get stuck into this one. Casliber (talk · contribs) 11:30, 13 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. But don't get stuck in gondwanathere teeth; they could probably handle pretty abrasive food. Ucucha 11:47, 13 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Right, where was I?

okay, I think "of the family Ferugliotheriidae" is probably a little better than "Ferugliotheriid" in the first line. To me the latter wording implies a familiarity with the term (which I suspect 99% of readers won't have). Also, the family redirects to the genus Ferugliotherium currently which says it is the only genus in the family (???)

Reworded. Yes, I hadn't touched that article yet (I intend to make a featured topic on gondwanatheres); I've made a quick stub on the family now.

~~The tooth is from the probably Maastrichtian Allen Formation~~ (??) --> " The tooth is probably from the Maastrichtian Allen Formation" - actually I would try and append this sentence onto the one before it. There a quite alot of teeth in the introduction it would be good to reduce. (PS: I can do this if you want)

Actually, it's certainly from the Allen F., but it's not quite certain that it is Maastrichtian. Clarified now. I think the sentence would get a little unwieldy merged, but I swapped out "The tooth".

~~As a one line at the end of the introduction, I think it is worth noting the family's relations are unclear or t has no close relations with any living species (??)~~

Done.

~~..a group of primitive mammals....~~ - I think if you add the one adjective "enigmatic" here, it says in one word that we know little about the group. I immediately clicked on the bluelink thinking "what the hell are they?" only to find another enigmatic group only known by teeth. "little-known" would be just as good.

I don't think "enigmatic" is a fit description for the dryolestoids, unless you consider any group of Mesozoic mammals "enigmatic". It is slightly weird that they first appeared in the Late Jurassic and Early Cretaceous of Laurasia, then disappear for a while only to reappear to dominate Late Cretaceous mammal faunas in Argentina, but such things happen.

would be great to get some sort of illustration for the Description section (sigh)

It's a pretty boring tooth, but it's worth a try to get an image released. Ucucha 21:20, 13 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

~~Otherwise~~ looking ~~good~~ Good. Casliber (talk · contribs) 21:11, 13 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]