![]() | Orcinus meyeri has been listed as one of the
Natural sciences good articles under the
good article criteria. If you can improve it further,
please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can
reassess it. Review: January 7, 2020. ( Reviewed version). |
![]() | This article is rated GA-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
Reviewer: Ceranthor ( talk · contribs) 18:55, 4 February 2019 (UTC)
I'll review this.
ceran
thor
18:55, 4 February 2019 (UTC)
@ Dunkleosteus77: Please ask someone to have a look and see if they agree, this content is in the wrong place. cygnis insignis 08:42, 13 February 2019 (UTC)
Sorry for the delay here. I will post comments ASAP! ceran thor 03:21, 19 February 2019 (UTC)
@ Dunkleosteus77: Not sure you saw this, so giving you a ping. ceran thor 22:03, 23 February 2019 (UTC)
@ Dunkleosteus77: Want to give you another chance to reply before I have to fail this for lack of activity. ceran thor 17:13, 4 March 2019 (UTC)
Otherwise, this is in decent shape. I also agree with Cygnis's comments above. ceran thor 03:39, 19 February 2019 (UTC)
The result of the move request was: Not moved. Nominator blocked by a CheckUser. ( non-admin closure) samee converse 08:56, 13 March 2019 (UTC)
Orcinus meyeri →
Orcopsis – Brandt (1873) intended Orca meyeri as a replacement name for Delphinus acutidens because he found the species epithet acutidens inappropriate (
https://books.google.com/books?id=wbpeAAAAcAAJ&pg=PA227&dq=orca+meyeri&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjm5-ujx9PgAhX_IDQIHe7nBRUQ6AEIKzAA#v=onepage&q=orca%20meyeri&f=false). Also, Delphinus acutidens was made the type species of the new genus Orcopsis by van Beneden in 1876 (
https://books.google.com/books?id=IBS1oGpcJ58C&pg=RA1-PA478&dq=orcopsis&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwiSzdqqx9PgAhUpHzQIHYNuBdcQ6AEIMDAB#v=onepage&q=orcopsis&f=false). Hence, Orca semseyi is a junior objective synonym of Delphinus acutidens, and Orcopsis is the technically correct genus name for D. acutidens.
68.4.252.105 (
talk) 04:50, 24 February 2019 (UTC) --Relisting.
Xain36 {
talk}
06:05, 3 March 2019 (UTC)
GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
Reviewer: Enwebb ( talk · contribs) 20:55, 17 December 2019 (UTC)
I'll take this one that has been languishing in the queue for a while.
Enwebb (
talk)
20:55, 17 December 2019 (UTC)
Given the general scarcity of information about this taxon, I think this article is broad in its coverage. Well written, free of copyvio, illustrated, neutral, and stable. Well done. Enwebb ( talk) 15:32, 7 January 2020 (UTC)
Nice to find this was expanded. I removed the term contentious from the lead, it is not clear who says that. FWIW, fossilworks lists the species as accepted. or not invalid, pardon if I missed where it is established the taxonomy is uncertain ~ cygnis insignis 07:02, 10 February 2022 (UTC)
Oh, I see that the fossilworks entry at Physeterula dubusi Van Beneden 1877 (sperm whale) refers to two type specimens, one in Belgium and the material here, "Delphinus acutidens: Its type locality is Stockach, which is in a Miocene marine horizon in Germany." The authority is "Belongs to Physeterula according to J. Velez-Juarbe et al. 2015", which I will look at. ~ cygnis insignis 07:13, 10 February 2022 (UTC)
![]() | Orcinus meyeri has been listed as one of the
Natural sciences good articles under the
good article criteria. If you can improve it further,
please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can
reassess it. Review: January 7, 2020. ( Reviewed version). |
![]() | This article is rated GA-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
Reviewer: Ceranthor ( talk · contribs) 18:55, 4 February 2019 (UTC)
I'll review this.
ceran
thor
18:55, 4 February 2019 (UTC)
@ Dunkleosteus77: Please ask someone to have a look and see if they agree, this content is in the wrong place. cygnis insignis 08:42, 13 February 2019 (UTC)
Sorry for the delay here. I will post comments ASAP! ceran thor 03:21, 19 February 2019 (UTC)
@ Dunkleosteus77: Not sure you saw this, so giving you a ping. ceran thor 22:03, 23 February 2019 (UTC)
@ Dunkleosteus77: Want to give you another chance to reply before I have to fail this for lack of activity. ceran thor 17:13, 4 March 2019 (UTC)
Otherwise, this is in decent shape. I also agree with Cygnis's comments above. ceran thor 03:39, 19 February 2019 (UTC)
The result of the move request was: Not moved. Nominator blocked by a CheckUser. ( non-admin closure) samee converse 08:56, 13 March 2019 (UTC)
Orcinus meyeri →
Orcopsis – Brandt (1873) intended Orca meyeri as a replacement name for Delphinus acutidens because he found the species epithet acutidens inappropriate (
https://books.google.com/books?id=wbpeAAAAcAAJ&pg=PA227&dq=orca+meyeri&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjm5-ujx9PgAhX_IDQIHe7nBRUQ6AEIKzAA#v=onepage&q=orca%20meyeri&f=false). Also, Delphinus acutidens was made the type species of the new genus Orcopsis by van Beneden in 1876 (
https://books.google.com/books?id=IBS1oGpcJ58C&pg=RA1-PA478&dq=orcopsis&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwiSzdqqx9PgAhUpHzQIHYNuBdcQ6AEIMDAB#v=onepage&q=orcopsis&f=false). Hence, Orca semseyi is a junior objective synonym of Delphinus acutidens, and Orcopsis is the technically correct genus name for D. acutidens.
68.4.252.105 (
talk) 04:50, 24 February 2019 (UTC) --Relisting.
Xain36 {
talk}
06:05, 3 March 2019 (UTC)
GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
Reviewer: Enwebb ( talk · contribs) 20:55, 17 December 2019 (UTC)
I'll take this one that has been languishing in the queue for a while.
Enwebb (
talk)
20:55, 17 December 2019 (UTC)
Given the general scarcity of information about this taxon, I think this article is broad in its coverage. Well written, free of copyvio, illustrated, neutral, and stable. Well done. Enwebb ( talk) 15:32, 7 January 2020 (UTC)
Nice to find this was expanded. I removed the term contentious from the lead, it is not clear who says that. FWIW, fossilworks lists the species as accepted. or not invalid, pardon if I missed where it is established the taxonomy is uncertain ~ cygnis insignis 07:02, 10 February 2022 (UTC)
Oh, I see that the fossilworks entry at Physeterula dubusi Van Beneden 1877 (sperm whale) refers to two type specimens, one in Belgium and the material here, "Delphinus acutidens: Its type locality is Stockach, which is in a Miocene marine horizon in Germany." The authority is "Belongs to Physeterula according to J. Velez-Juarbe et al. 2015", which I will look at. ~ cygnis insignis 07:13, 10 February 2022 (UTC)