The text of the entry was: Did you know ... that Mimodactylus(reconstruction pictured) is the first complete pterosaur from the Afro-Arabian continent?
Current status: Featured article
This article is rated FA-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following
WikiProjects:
Mimodactylus is part of WikiProject Amphibians and Reptiles, an effort to make Wikipedia a standardized, informative, comprehensive and easy-to-use resource for
amphibians and
reptiles. If you would like to participate, you can choose to edit this article, or visit the
project page for more information.Amphibians and ReptilesWikipedia:WikiProject Amphibians and ReptilesTemplate:WikiProject Amphibians and Reptilesamphibian and reptile articles
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
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Lebanon, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
Lebanon-related articles 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.LebanonWikipedia:WikiProject LebanonTemplate:WikiProject LebanonLebanon articles
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
The only known specimen of this pterosaur (extinct group of flying reptiles) – not that anything needs to be changed necessarily, but I wonder if it makes sense to explain the term "pterosaur" in the body but not in the lead. Probably, at this point, the reader would have looked it up anyways, maybe this explanation is not needed.
Removed, I think we had this talk sometimes before, I added it once because it was asked for at a FAC, but it probably isn't necessary.
FunkMonk (
talk)
09:42, 17 August 2023 (UTC)reply
and joint between the skull and jaw flattened – maybe "and the jaw joint flattened"? I think we need an additional "the" in any case?
The dentition of Mimodactylus differs from that of most other ornithocheiroids. – This is a bit difficult to follow, since "Ornithocheiroidae" is not introduced and also does not appear in the cladogram, and because the following sentences mostly say in which taxa the features are also found, instead of pointing out differences. Maybe remove this sentence?
Mimodactylus does not have the lancet-shaped teeth with sideways compressed crowns which are characteristic of istiodactylids, though, – Since this sentence is a direct follow-up of the previous sentence, I think it should not mark a new paragraph.
While insectivory could not be ruled out, these researchers found the evidence to most likely indicate a diet of crustaceans – The food section is a bit long and this reads repetitive as it was already stated.
The British palaeontologist Mark Witton found it unlikely in 2013 that istiodactylids and their relatives were especially proficient on the ground, due to their disproportionate limbs and small appendages, though they may have had relatively large thigh muscles. He also found the feet too small in relation to their body size to have been used for climbing or suspension, as had previously been suggested.[10] – I wonder if we really should generalise this to Mimodactylus. Mimodactylus is of a separate family of which Witton had no knowledge when he made that statement. But not sure.
Removed, though the starts off a bit more generally (and Haopterus, the other mimodactylid, was known at the time, and covered in that chapter): "It seems unlikely that any ornithocheiroids, including istiodactylids, were particularly proficient terrestrial animals. Their disproportionate limbs and tiny appendages look ill suited for walking or running, and even though istiodactylid hindlimbs are more proportionate to their forelimbs than those of other ornithocheiroids, they remain offset enough to have probably hindered terrestrial locomotion."
FunkMonk (
talk)
08:23, 19 August 2023 (UTC)reply
Reads very well. I particularly like the History of discovery section; Wikipedia seems to be the only place where such information is systematically collected. --
Jens Lallensack (
talk)
00:16, 16 August 2023 (UTC)reply
Thanks, yeah, this is one of those articles where if there weren't news reports and press releases, there would be very little to say about its discovery just from the published paper. So I definitely think such can be worth including, if it adds unique, contextual information.
FunkMonk (
talk)
09:42, 17 August 2023 (UTC)reply
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Did you know nomination
The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as
this nomination's talk page,
the article's talk page or
Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.
Recent GA by a trusted editor; hooks are interesting and are supported by the sources, when I spot-checked the hook sources noted no copyvio in the hooks. No image in hook so no need to check that. No red flags noted;
FunkMonk and
Elias Ziade; a QPQ is needed here.
Hog FarmTalk00:41, 24 August 2023 (UTC)reply
Thanks, I think this is only my third DYK, so I don't remember the details. When I review another DYK, should it be noted here? Not sure were Elias went, but he has more experience.
FunkMonk (
talk)
08:05, 24 August 2023 (UTC)reply
If this is only your third nomination then you don't need to do a QPQ; however, should you choose to do one anyway, you can mention it here. However, since you aren't required to do a QPQ yet, if you do chose to do a review, you can just save it for later and use it as your QPQ once you reach five nominations and thus need to do one at the sixth.
Narutolovehinata5 (
talk ·
contributions)
10:13, 24 August 2023 (UTC)reply
I'll repeat the citations in the specific sentences, then, that part wasn't stated in in the abbreviated version of the instructions. As for the image, it was first published in this 2019 paper, not in 2023, so I don't think later publications have any bearing on the original. Nowhere does the caption or article state that this image has a different licence than the rest of the article and its imagery, it simply names the artist (no "courtesy of" or "copyright of").
FunkMonk (
talk)
19:54, 28 August 2023 (UTC)reply
The text of the entry was: Did you know ... that Mimodactylus(reconstruction pictured) is the first complete pterosaur from the Afro-Arabian continent?
Current status: Featured article
This article is rated FA-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following
WikiProjects:
Mimodactylus is part of WikiProject Amphibians and Reptiles, an effort to make Wikipedia a standardized, informative, comprehensive and easy-to-use resource for
amphibians and
reptiles. If you would like to participate, you can choose to edit this article, or visit the
project page for more information.Amphibians and ReptilesWikipedia:WikiProject Amphibians and ReptilesTemplate:WikiProject Amphibians and Reptilesamphibian and reptile articles
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
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Lebanon, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
Lebanon-related articles 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.LebanonWikipedia:WikiProject LebanonTemplate:WikiProject LebanonLebanon articles
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
The only known specimen of this pterosaur (extinct group of flying reptiles) – not that anything needs to be changed necessarily, but I wonder if it makes sense to explain the term "pterosaur" in the body but not in the lead. Probably, at this point, the reader would have looked it up anyways, maybe this explanation is not needed.
Removed, I think we had this talk sometimes before, I added it once because it was asked for at a FAC, but it probably isn't necessary.
FunkMonk (
talk)
09:42, 17 August 2023 (UTC)reply
and joint between the skull and jaw flattened – maybe "and the jaw joint flattened"? I think we need an additional "the" in any case?
The dentition of Mimodactylus differs from that of most other ornithocheiroids. – This is a bit difficult to follow, since "Ornithocheiroidae" is not introduced and also does not appear in the cladogram, and because the following sentences mostly say in which taxa the features are also found, instead of pointing out differences. Maybe remove this sentence?
Mimodactylus does not have the lancet-shaped teeth with sideways compressed crowns which are characteristic of istiodactylids, though, – Since this sentence is a direct follow-up of the previous sentence, I think it should not mark a new paragraph.
While insectivory could not be ruled out, these researchers found the evidence to most likely indicate a diet of crustaceans – The food section is a bit long and this reads repetitive as it was already stated.
The British palaeontologist Mark Witton found it unlikely in 2013 that istiodactylids and their relatives were especially proficient on the ground, due to their disproportionate limbs and small appendages, though they may have had relatively large thigh muscles. He also found the feet too small in relation to their body size to have been used for climbing or suspension, as had previously been suggested.[10] – I wonder if we really should generalise this to Mimodactylus. Mimodactylus is of a separate family of which Witton had no knowledge when he made that statement. But not sure.
Removed, though the starts off a bit more generally (and Haopterus, the other mimodactylid, was known at the time, and covered in that chapter): "It seems unlikely that any ornithocheiroids, including istiodactylids, were particularly proficient terrestrial animals. Their disproportionate limbs and tiny appendages look ill suited for walking or running, and even though istiodactylid hindlimbs are more proportionate to their forelimbs than those of other ornithocheiroids, they remain offset enough to have probably hindered terrestrial locomotion."
FunkMonk (
talk)
08:23, 19 August 2023 (UTC)reply
Reads very well. I particularly like the History of discovery section; Wikipedia seems to be the only place where such information is systematically collected. --
Jens Lallensack (
talk)
00:16, 16 August 2023 (UTC)reply
Thanks, yeah, this is one of those articles where if there weren't news reports and press releases, there would be very little to say about its discovery just from the published paper. So I definitely think such can be worth including, if it adds unique, contextual information.
FunkMonk (
talk)
09:42, 17 August 2023 (UTC)reply
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Did you know nomination
The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as
this nomination's talk page,
the article's talk page or
Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.
Recent GA by a trusted editor; hooks are interesting and are supported by the sources, when I spot-checked the hook sources noted no copyvio in the hooks. No image in hook so no need to check that. No red flags noted;
FunkMonk and
Elias Ziade; a QPQ is needed here.
Hog FarmTalk00:41, 24 August 2023 (UTC)reply
Thanks, I think this is only my third DYK, so I don't remember the details. When I review another DYK, should it be noted here? Not sure were Elias went, but he has more experience.
FunkMonk (
talk)
08:05, 24 August 2023 (UTC)reply
If this is only your third nomination then you don't need to do a QPQ; however, should you choose to do one anyway, you can mention it here. However, since you aren't required to do a QPQ yet, if you do chose to do a review, you can just save it for later and use it as your QPQ once you reach five nominations and thus need to do one at the sixth.
Narutolovehinata5 (
talk ·
contributions)
10:13, 24 August 2023 (UTC)reply
I'll repeat the citations in the specific sentences, then, that part wasn't stated in in the abbreviated version of the instructions. As for the image, it was first published in this 2019 paper, not in 2023, so I don't think later publications have any bearing on the original. Nowhere does the caption or article state that this image has a different licence than the rest of the article and its imagery, it simply names the artist (no "courtesy of" or "copyright of").
FunkMonk (
talk)
19:54, 28 August 2023 (UTC)reply