Talk:Erratus/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Wretchskull (talk · contribs) 16:31, 11 February 2022 (UTC)

This is a highly technical article that isn't accessible to normal readers; work will be needed on prose.

Lede

• Link arthropod and nektonic.
• The lede could probably be expanded considering the amount of info in the body.

History of study

• Link carapace and euarthropod.
• Citations come after punctuation; quotation marks included.

Classification

• The last sentence is unreferenced.
• Add a comma after "however".

Paleoecology

• Link Cambrian period and fauna.

General

• Is there any info on the etymology of "Erratus sperare"?

@Fossiladder13: Before I continue the review, I'll give you time to perhaps simplify the prose for accessibility, and to implement this source that was published in February 8th. Wretchskull (talk) 16:31, 11 February 2022 (UTC)

@Wretchskull: Ok I edited it a bit, is there anything else that could be improved?.

Lede

• Arthropod is linked twice in the lede.
• Is there a reason why the first pararaph has references but the second one doesn't? Consistency is needed; either add refs to the second paragraph or, preferably, remove refs from the lede and make sure they're incorporated in the body.

History of study

"[...] biramous limb evolution.[3]" --> "[...] biramous limb evolution."[3]

References

• No copyvio found.
• Spotchecks:
  • Ref 2 doesn't support that "Erratus on the other hand has a set of primitive legs". It may sure be phylogenetically primitive, but that isn't stated by the source. Am I missing something?
  • Why does ref 6 have a url to the site as a separate link rather than being clickable through the title?
  • I didn't find any other issues.

@Fossiladder13: Ping me when you're done. Wretchskull (talk) 13:58, 13 February 2022 (UTC)

@Wretchskull okay I’ve gotten the problems you listed covered, however reference six I believe either doesn’t work that way, or the person who added it got directly from the site. Fossiladder13 (talk) 16:54, 13 February 2022 (UTC)

• In the "Paleoecology" section, the following is stated: "One of the most important creatures from the site is Myllokunmingia, an early chordate that might be one of the oldest agnathans (jawless fish.) The site also preserves more enigmatic fauna, like Yunnanozoon lividum, which might be a very early hemichordate or chordate, Eldonia has been suggested to have been a holothurian, siphonophoran, or other cnidarian, and Dinomischus, a very rare stalked animal that could be an echinoderm." What does any of this have to do with the article? This information is WP:UNDUE and should instead be incorporated in the article Chengjiang Biota.
• If everything mentioned in the lede already exists in the body, remove the references from the lede. I also see that there are references being used in the lede that aren't being used in the body.
• There is no mention of who and when Erratus sperare in the lede.
• The language is still far too technical in many locations.

@Fossiladder13: I'm sorry, but there are just far too many problems with this article to be a GA at the moment. I want you to address these points and keep your head up; I know it is frustrating for ones GAN to fail, but you'll learn a lot about the process. It's also important to pay close attention to the GAN criteria at WP:GAC. My advice is that you re-nominate the article after a few weeks, during which you can address the issues (something I can help you with) and learn how GAN's usually unfold, which you can see at WP:GAN (preferably the "Biology and medicine section", which I assume is your field of expertise). Good luck! Wretchskull (talk) 19:26, 13 February 2022 (UTC)

Ok got it Fossiladder13 (talk) 19:30, 13 February 2022 (UTC)