Talk:Nakalipithecus/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Gog the Mild (talk · contribs) 20:16, 6 May 2020 (UTC)

I'll have a look at this. Give me a day or two. Gog the Mild (talk) 20:16, 6 May 2020 (UTC)

I will be doing some copy editing as I go. Let me know if I mess anything up or do anything you don't like.

• "an extinct species of great ape from the Late Miocene of Nakali, Kenya, about 9.9–9.8 million years ago" That reads as if "Late Miocene" is a place in Nakali. And does 9.9–9.8 million years ago refer to when Nakalipithecus lived or when the Late Miocene was? (*Rhetorical question alert*)

fixed   User:Dunkleosteus77 |push to talk  00:56, 7 May 2020 (UTC)

• "The holotype preserves all 3 lower molars" Left or right?

added "right jawbone"   User:Dunkleosteus77 |push to talk  00:56, 7 May 2020 (UTC)

• "the 9 million year old Greek Ouranopithecus" If you mean the genus you will upset the Turks by describing it as Greek; if you mean Ouranopithecus macedoniensis (which I suspect you do) then your link is wrong.

Why does the species have its own article??   User:Dunkleosteus77 |push to talk  00:56, 7 May 2020 (UTC)

• "Like modern and some contemporary apes" What is the difference between a "modern" and a "contemporary ape"? (Yes, I know, but it is a trap for that mythical beast, the average Wikipedia reader.)

How would you word it?   User:Dunkleosteus77 |push to talk  00:56, 7 May 2020 (UTC)

'Like modern apes and some apes contemporary with Nakalipithecus, but unlike earlier East African apes, the first molar is relatively large, with a first molar to second molar ratio of 85%'

or

'The first molar is relatively large, with a first molar to second molar ratio of 85%, like those of modern apes and some of Nakalipithecus's contemporaries, but unlike earlier East African apes.'

done on first use of "contemporary"   User:Dunkleosteus77 |push to talk  13:31, 7 May 2020 (UTC)

• "M1/M2 ratio" I think that this needs to be written in full. (As you do in the following sentence.)

done   User:Dunkleosteus77 |push to talk  00:56, 7 May 2020 (UTC)

• "and early Indian Sivapithecus" What does "early Indian" mean?

early Sivapithecus (a species from India) as opposed to later Sivapithecus specimens   User:Dunkleosteus77 |push to talk  00:56, 7 May 2020 (UTC)

Apologies, I should have added "(*Rhetorical question alert*)". Would it be possible to add a similar clarification for readers. So they don't, for example, think that all Sivapithecus come from India and that the text is merely indicating that they were earlier than Nakalipithecus.

done   User:Dunkleosteus77 |push to talk  13:31, 7 May 2020 (UTC)

• "than that of the Southeast Asian Khoratpithecus." Do we want to insert 'contemporary', or 'slightly later' or something?

added   User:Dunkleosteus77 |push to talk  00:56, 7 May 2020 (UTC)

• "Climate change caused the expansion of grasslands in Africa from 10–7 milling years ago, likely fragmenting populations of forest-dwelling primates." Given that you state that this commenced a little before (or depending on the margin of error, contemporaneously with) Nakalipithecus's remains I am not sure how you are this relates to the topic. (If at all.)

forgot "leading to extinction"   User:Dunkleosteus77 |push to talk  00:56, 7 May 2020 (UTC)

• "and possibly Choerolophodon, and the colobine monkey Microcolobus." The use of commas here has confused me. If Microcolobus is "possibly", the comma should be before the first "and", not the second.

I'm confused. Microcolobus is not possibly, and Choerolophodon is an elephant (that's why it's "the elephant Deinotherium and possibly Choerolophodon")

An easy solution would be:

'the horse Hipparion, the colobine monkey, the elephant Deinotherium and, possibly, the elephant Choerolophodon'. (Or 'the horse Hipparion, the colobine monkey, and the elephants Deinotherium and possibly Choerolophodon'.)

Or:

'the horse Hipparion, the elephant Deinotherium, and, possibly, Choerolophodon, and the colobine monkey Microcolobus.' (Or 'the horse Hipparion, the elephant Deinotherium – and, possibly, Choerolophodon – and the colobine monkey Microcolobus.'

Is "the elephants Deinotherium and (possibly) Choerolophodon..." fine?   User:Dunkleosteus77 |push to talk  13:31, 7 May 2020 (UTC)

That is clear to me.

• "Samburupithecus was nearly contemporaneous with Nakalipithecus, and was discovered 60 km (37 mi) to the north of Nakali." Optional: This may be worth mentioning at the first mention of Samburupithecus.
• The cladogram forms a MOS:SANDWICH with the bottom of the infobox. Perhaps drop it a paragraph?

done   User:Dunkleosteus77 |push to talk  00:56, 7 May 2020 (UTC)

• Nakaya et al (2010): a page range?

that's actually a conference   User:Dunkleosteus77 |push to talk  00:56, 7 May 2020 (UTC)

*smacks head* You are citing the abstract. Apologies; it was late.

Gog the Mild (talk) 21:22, 6 May 2020 (UTC)

A solid little article. Promoting. Gog the Mild (talk) 13:39, 7 May 2020 (UTC)

Good Article review progress box Criteria: 1a. prose () 1b. MoS () 2a. ref layout () 2b. cites WP:RS () 2c. no WP:OR () 2d. no WP:CV () 3a. broadness () 3b. focus () 4. neutral () 5. stable () 6a. free or tagged images () 6b. pics relevant () Note: this represents where the article stands relative to the Good Article criteria. Criteria marked are unassessed