Talk:Vernonopterus

Vernonopterus 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 30, 2019. (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:Vernonopterus/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Super Ψ Dro 15:05, 24 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi again. I'll have a look at the article soon. Super Ψ Dro 15:05, 24 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

For now, you could try to add something from the original description. At least the specific name is mentioned.

Ha! I can see now why his description of it has been seen as inadequate. I added in the specific name and that he thought it lived on land. Ichthyovenator (talk) 07:03, 25 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

In Tetlie's thesis of 2004 (link in case you don't have access to it), there's a cladogram mentioning Vernonopterus, but it doesn't even show its hibbertopterid affinities (in fact it's something... strange in general), so you are free to want to include it or not.

I can't seem to access EthOS. If the cladogram doesn't support the current idea of its classification then I'm not sure it would be necessary to include. Ichthyovenator (talk) 07:05, 25 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Strange, I neither can now. I don't remember how I got the thesis, it was months ago. The cladogram was not very good either, so nothing happens.

"that almost morph into a three ridges" should be "that almost morph into three ridges".

Fixed. Ichthyovenator (talk) 15:54, 26 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe explain what the appendages are.

Explained. Ichthyovenator (talk) 15:54, 26 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Specify that Robert Dunlop was Scottish (or British).

I think "local" already does that since the location is in Scotland. Ichthyovenator (talk) 15:54, 26 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, fair enough. Super Ψ Dro 17:25, 26 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

"a more complete description by british geologist" British.

Explained. Ichthyovenator (talk) 15:54, 26 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

"to give strength to and preserve the very fragile fossil" I guess this "to" is should be removed?

I think the "to" should stay, it's "give strengh to the very fragile fossil" and "preserve the very fragile fossil" merged into one sentence. Ichthyovenator (talk) 15:54, 26 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Okay then. Super Ψ Dro 17:25, 26 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

"those eurypterids that possessed swimming paddles" I'm not sure if it's right to use "those", but it's your decision.

I think "those" is correct here, I removed it though since it works just as well without it. Ichthyovenator (talk) 15:54, 26 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Can the telson be considered as a segment?

I have seen it described as the final body segment, yes. Ichthyovenator (talk) 15:54, 26 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

"and norwegian paleontologist" Norwegian.

Fixed. Ichthyovenator (talk) 15:54, 26 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe explain gladius.

Explained. Ichthyovenator (talk) 15:54, 26 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

"poterolaterally" You mean posterolaterally?

Yes, fixed. Ichthyovenator (talk) 15:54, 26 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

"Out of this actinopterygian diversity, there many" there were many?

Fixed. Ichthyovenator (talk) 15:54, 26 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

"haplolepid fish" "Fishes" is used when talking about several species of fish, if I'm not wrong. It's used in biology.

I have seen "fish" used as plural as well, changed it to "fishes" any way since that's correct too. Ichthyovenator (talk) 15:54, 26 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Why does the link cover the generic name but not the specific name of these fishes? And when a genus is mentioned for the first time, you should abbreviate it in the remaining mentions.

It's a bit of an odd choice, yeah, but I figured that since the articles are on the genera I might as well just link those. I know they should be abbreviated, but some of the genera start with the same letter so I wanted to avoid that. Ichthyovenator (talk) 15:54, 26 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think there will be confusion as long as all the species of a genus are mentioned after the first mention of the genus (I should start using a synonym for "mention"), it is understood that they belong to that genus and not to another. Super Ψ Dro 17:25, 26 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Done. Ichthyovenator (talk) 07:37, 30 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe explain "prosomal", but you don't have to.

"Prosoma" is explained, so "prosomal appendages" should make sense without explanation I think. Ichthyovenator (talk) 15:54, 26 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

You explain telson twice, in the history and in the paleoecology.

Oops, removed the second explanation. Ichthyovenator (talk) 15:54, 26 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

In this paper the ornamentation of Vernonopterus is described in detail, and its phylogenetic position is also discussed. I think you can add something from there.

Added one paragraph to the description and one paragraph to the classification. Ichthyovenator (talk) 07:37, 30 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Something happened with the citation. Super Ψ Dro 09:47, 30 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

That's strange. Fixed it now. Ichthyovenator (talk) 11:10, 30 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

You could mention the etymology and the size in the lead.

Done. Ichthyovenator (talk) 07:37, 30 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

"Appendages" is linked in its second mention, not in the first one.

Fixed. Ichthyovenator (talk) 07:37, 30 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

It is not completely necessary but you could also say that V. minutisculptus was briefly assigned to Hibbertopterus.

Done. Ichthyovenator (talk) 07:37, 30 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

There are some duplicate links that should be removed.

Removed all I think. Ichthyovenator (talk) 07:37, 30 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe explain "dual respiratory system".

Done. Ichthyovenator (talk) 07:37, 30 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Some links could be added. I suggest genus, fossil, deposits, species, abdomen, family, ornamentation, exoskeleton, environment, holotype, fossil hunter, geologist, suborder, segment, Eurypterus, Leif Størmer, superfamily, ventral, spines, scales, phylogenetic, brackish, fresh water, Stylonurina, Hibbertopterus and junior synonym. I'm sorry if I'm looking very fussy with the links...

Ha! It's fine, I'm not sure the rules of linking everything are as strict on GA:s as on FA:s but making sure everything that should be linked is linked can only improve the article :) Linked most of these. Ichthyovenator (talk) 07:37, 30 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

That would be all. I like the prose and use of the words that the article has, good work. Super Ψ Dro 17:48, 25 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Nothing more to add, passing now. At this rate I will never be able to reach you :) Super Ψ Dro 12:17, 30 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! I'm sure Hibbertopterus is going to keep me busy for quite a while ;) Ichthyovenator (talk) 12:26, 30 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]