Parvancorina is within the scope of WikiProject Animals, an attempt to better organize information in articles related to
animals and
zoology. For more information, visit the
project page.AnimalsWikipedia:WikiProject AnimalsTemplate:WikiProject Animalsanimal 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
Maybe it's just me, but the first two sentences in the Affinity section leave me wondering what meaning they are intended to convey. Is there somebody with knowledge of this topic who could perhaps re-write them?
"Pij" (
talk)
03:30, 4 September 2014 (UTC)reply
That's the problem with incertae sedis: we don't really know what it is. Parvancorina is suspected of being an arthropod by a lot of researchers due to its superficial similarity to trilobite protaspid shields, but, its growth habit is not suggestive of an arthropod.--
Mr Fink (
talk)
04:30, 4 September 2014 (UTC)reply
No, missing my point. I'm not talking about the content of the sentence, but its structure. How do the words "is the Cambrian trilobite-like arthropods" relate to the rest of the sentence? Are they an artefact of some previous cut-and-paste, or are they supposed to be linked somehow?
"Pij" (
talk)
00:22, 20 November 2014 (UTC)reply
I would think that "Cambrian trilobite-like arthropods" is an artefact of sources which talk about Parvancorina's similarity to the protaspid-stage of trilobite larvae, and of various primitive Cambrian arthropods like Skania and Naraoia. Perhaps simply going with "primitive arthropods" would be less confusing?--
Mr Fink (
talk)
00:49, 20 November 2014 (UTC)reply
Now that I can see the intention of the sentence, I see that simply excising "is the" would have been the main requirement. Those two words, it would seem, were an artefact that didn't belong at all. Yes, it is clear now. Thanks.
"Pij" (
talk)
05:42, 18 February 2015 (UTC)reply
Parvancorina is within the scope of WikiProject Animals, an attempt to better organize information in articles related to
animals and
zoology. For more information, visit the
project page.AnimalsWikipedia:WikiProject AnimalsTemplate:WikiProject Animalsanimal 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
Maybe it's just me, but the first two sentences in the Affinity section leave me wondering what meaning they are intended to convey. Is there somebody with knowledge of this topic who could perhaps re-write them?
"Pij" (
talk)
03:30, 4 September 2014 (UTC)reply
That's the problem with incertae sedis: we don't really know what it is. Parvancorina is suspected of being an arthropod by a lot of researchers due to its superficial similarity to trilobite protaspid shields, but, its growth habit is not suggestive of an arthropod.--
Mr Fink (
talk)
04:30, 4 September 2014 (UTC)reply
No, missing my point. I'm not talking about the content of the sentence, but its structure. How do the words "is the Cambrian trilobite-like arthropods" relate to the rest of the sentence? Are they an artefact of some previous cut-and-paste, or are they supposed to be linked somehow?
"Pij" (
talk)
00:22, 20 November 2014 (UTC)reply
I would think that "Cambrian trilobite-like arthropods" is an artefact of sources which talk about Parvancorina's similarity to the protaspid-stage of trilobite larvae, and of various primitive Cambrian arthropods like Skania and Naraoia. Perhaps simply going with "primitive arthropods" would be less confusing?--
Mr Fink (
talk)
00:49, 20 November 2014 (UTC)reply
Now that I can see the intention of the sentence, I see that simply excising "is the" would have been the main requirement. Those two words, it would seem, were an artefact that didn't belong at all. Yes, it is clear now. Thanks.
"Pij" (
talk)
05:42, 18 February 2015 (UTC)reply