Talk:Mesopropithecus/GA1
GA Review
Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch
Reviewer: Ucucha 15:19, 8 March 2010 (UTC)
More later, but some quick things:
- Palmer does not even list Mesopropithecus, so I find it rather dubious to reference him. For dolichobrachion at least, the original paper gives the etymology, so you can just cite them.
- I realize that Palmer doesn't list the genus or species, but he does define their roots. I know I'm stretching it. Another option is for me to buy "Bioscientific Terminology" and "Dictionary of Word Roots and Combining Forms" and look the roots up in there. Or would that be consider OR? Depend on what you say, I may buy those books tonight. I really need a source for Greek and Latin roots if I'm going to write Etymology sections for lemur pages (or any other species). In the meantime, I may have to leave the interpretation of "Mesopropithecus" without a citation, at least until the books arrive (if I buy them). – VisionHolder « talk » 00:44, 9 March 2010 (UTC)
- The problem with almost anything of the kind is that they are missing the significance of the names. For example, Mesopropithecus means "middle" + "before" + "ape", but just listing the roots is that the -propithecus almost certainly has something to do with the generic name of the sifakas. Any attempt at constructing an etymology for a scientific name from a source that does not explicitly deal with that scientific name is borderline OR to me, but I won't push that. Ucucha 18:26, 9 March 2010 (UTC)
- I realize that Palmer doesn't list the genus or species, but he does define their roots. I know I'm stretching it. Another option is for me to buy "Bioscientific Terminology" and "Dictionary of Word Roots and Combining Forms" and look the roots up in there. Or would that be consider OR? Depend on what you say, I may buy those books tonight. I really need a source for Greek and Latin roots if I'm going to write Etymology sections for lemur pages (or any other species). In the meantime, I may have to leave the interpretation of "Mesopropithecus" without a citation, at least until the books arrive (if I buy them). – VisionHolder « talk » 00:44, 9 March 2010 (UTC)
Could you recast the list of characters into prose? I think that disrupts the flow of the article less than a list like this. You yourself made the opposite change in Ekbletomys, so I guess this is a conscious choice. Also see the guideline at WP:EMBED.
Ucucha 15:19, 8 March 2010 (UTC)
- I will give it a try in a minute. The list was turning into a very long sentence, so I broke it up. But I don't mind converting it back. The lists make it hard to place the cladogram anyway. – VisionHolder « talk » 00:44, 9 March 2010 (UTC)
- forelimbs but hind limbs?
- Add to lead that three species were allopatric?
- Probably better to move the sentence saying they are known from subfossils to before the sentence saying they were among the smallest of the subfossil lemurs.
- Explain sagittal and nuchal crest
- When was Neopropithecus synonymized under Mesopropithecus.
- Hasn't the northern Palaeopropithecus been described as a new species?
- Is there anything about which two species are more closely related to each other than to the third?
- Probably need to give the alternative dental formula again. Aren't dental homologies fun?
- Many unexplained technical terms in the skull description.
- Mandible and folivory—what would a gracile mandible suggest they ate? Something softer?