Talk:Xiphodon

Xiphodon 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: June 21, 2024. (Reviewed version).

Mammals Low‑importance

	Mammals portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Mammals, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of mammal-related subjects 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.MammalsWikipedia:WikiProject MammalsTemplate:WikiProject Mammalsmammal articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Palaeontology Mid‑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
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

GA Review

Passed. SilverTiger12 (talk) 21:51, 21 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

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

Nominator: PrimalMustelid (talk · contribs) 23:17, 6 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Reviewer: SilverTiger12 (talk · contribs) 18:25, 16 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I have surfaced from my long ~~catnap~~slumber and have taken up the task of reviewing this article.

This article is stable.
This article has no tags or banner requesting clean-up.
This article is highly unlikely to contain copyvio according to Eargwig.
It is broad in its coverage- yes, this article likely summarizes everything known about this relatively obscure taxon.
It is illustrated; all images are tagged with their respective licenses.
Everything is cited to reliable sources, which are formatted correctly and linked where possible. There's a bunch of Biodiversity Library links for the older ones, which is nice.

Now for the hard part, actually reading the article:

Lede

I made some changes but the prose overall still feels a bit clunky. But the lede overall is of a good length and hits the high points of the article.

(More to come...)

Continuance:

Bold the Xiphodon mention in the cladogram
Link tympanic bullae in Description.
The upper ear canal's morphology in Xiphodon is recorded also in the Palaeogene camelid Poebrotherium. Why is the relevant? Do you mean they have the same or similar morphology there?
While I'd recommend giving it a close copyedit for clarity and sentence length overall, everything is understandable if you pay enough attention so I have no issues with the prose.

It's really close to GA, honestly, you've gotten better at writing in general. SilverTiger12 (talk) 21:09, 21 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, and I implemented your suggestions. PrimalMustelid (talk) 21:25, 21 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.