Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Laquintasaura/archive1 - Wikipedia


Article Images

Laquintasaura (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

As of 9 October 2024, 15:29 (UTC), this page is active and open for discussion. An FAC coordinator will be responsible for closing the nomination.

Nominator(s): LittleLazyLass (Talk | Contributions) 06:49, 24 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This article is about one of the earliest known members of Ornithischia, one of the three major groups of dinosaurs. It's a very important picture of their evolution and the first time a primitive ornithischian rather than one of the more famous later forms has made it up to FAC—though hopefully not the last. LittleLazyLass (Talk | Contributions) 06:49, 24 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

General thoughts by Generalissima

  • I would heavily, heavily recommend using SFNs or some other form of page notation for every book/journal cite. This makes it a lot easier for both readers and reviewers.
  • A lot of these paragraphs are a bit too large to be easily readable in my eyes; the penultimate paragraph of the Discovery and naming section is the worst offender here.
  • Lede seems a bit short relative to the total length of the body, might be good to beef it up a little.
  • All images are appropriately licensed. This isn't a FA requirement, but I'd recommend adding alt-text.

That's all at first check. Generalissima (talk) (it/she) 07:25, 24 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Feedback by Shushugah

  • I did not realize how prominent country locations were for Dinosaurs, despite fact that Earth/geopolitics has changed a lot since. For example Lesotho is enclaved within South Africa. But if this is the convention, I accept it.
  • Use straight quotes ie wiki conventions for MOS:APOSTROPHE e.g not ‘’
    I've fixed what I think is the only problem case here, but let me know if I've missed one.
  • a partial left ischium
    Fixed.
  • Place image of skull in Section about features, particularly passage about uniform teeth
    No free images of the skull material are available, but I will see if any of our usual palaeo diagram makers can whip up one of the teeth since they're the distinctive portion.
    Never mind, I mixed up what is represented in File:Lesothosaurus sp skull 3894.jpg
  • In the diagram, why do other names e.g Parapredentata preview to Ornithischia?
    They do not have their own pages and so redirect to their parent clade, which is considered to be similar enough in topic that it would be redundant to give them all pages. Either way it's not particularly the concern of this article how the higher clades are organized on the site.
  • Putting two wide charts in same row is inaccessible on desktop and certainly mobile. Move them to separate and avoid language like "left/right" chart and instead refer to first/second charts.
    It can certainly be made sequential if it's a dealbreaker issue, but it's been used in dinosaur FAs such as Lythronax and Spinophorosaurus before. Desktop setups will vary but the mobile app does not have any issue displaying the two cladograms for me.
    Formally WP:ACCESSIBILITY is not part of FA criteria, but I find it very unreadable on mobile (web view) and think it could be improved with a table title for each.
  • Section named Palaeoecology does not make it obvious what Palaeoecology even is.
    This is a standard section in many dinosaurs FAs (sometimes substituted for palaeoenvironment), and does not usually include an explicit explanation. But as soon as I track down a citation I can add a link to the paleoecology page if necessary.
    I can open the article on Palaeoecology, if I know to search/click for it. So a short 1-2 line intro helps. Readers might be avid paleo-enthusiasts or completely new to the topic, so should cater to both audiences.
  • I like the layout of Theropoda where it has a Biology section, and within each is organized by section for easier navigation.
    While a dinosaur article would usually include a "palaeobiology" section touching on the various physiological functions of the animal, this research simply doesn't exist in Laquintasaura. The only potential contents would be the couple sentences of histological information currently within the [physical] description section instead.

Sourcing and references

  • Wiki link all journals/websites mentioned in sourcing
  • Consistently link to DOI
    As far as I can tell this is already the case.
    You are right. I was checking in edit mode
  • Consistent author names Breeden III, Bejamin T. and Breeden, Benjamin T.
    Fixed.
  • Inline body, is it normal to quote full name of first author and only last name of second author? Example A later 2021 study by Carlos-Manuel Herrera-Castillo, Sánchez-Villagra
    I'd consider that an oversight, I'll change it.
    Oh, I actually see why this was written that was now. Sanchez-Villagra was already introduced with his full name earlier in the section, and so just used his last name afterwards. Herrera-Castillo is first referred to in this sentence and uses a full name.
  • Some incorrect source parameters including incorrect pages e.g pages=e75248, pages=e1791894 and pages=e12619.

~ 🦝 Shushugah (he/him • talk) 11:54, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

FM