The text of the entry was: Did you know ...that eighty years on, scientists are still debating whether the
Palæozoicfossils known as Chitinozoans(
SEM image pictured) represent plants, animals or eggs?
This article is rated GA-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following
WikiProjects:
Chitinozoan 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
Talk:Chitinozoan is part of WikiProject Geology, an attempt at creating a standardized, informative, comprehensive and easy-to-use
geology resource. If you would like to participate, you can choose to edit this article, or visit the
project page for more information.GeologyWikipedia:WikiProject GeologyTemplate:WikiProject GeologyGeology 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
I've just gave a definition to start something. There's not a lot of information about (micro-)fossils in this encyclopedia. Feel free to edit and correct (language) mistakes!
The previous unsigned comment was left on 19:37, 27 September 2004 by
Georingo
I'd like to see the lead a little bit bigger. Right now it feels a bit skimpy for the density and size of the article. Consider putting in when they were discovered, something about Eisenack, a bit about their ecology, etc.
YDone
Why are they useful biostratigraphic markers? (from the lead).
Not sure I've understood this comment; I've expanded the lede in this respect, a full explanation is in the "Stratigraphic application" section.
For the non-biologist/paleontologist ... when exactly is the Ordovician? Pre dionosaur or after? (Hey, I study medieval history, you'd be as at sea if I just linked Anglo-Danish) An era would be nice.
I hope I've addressed this - I'm somewhat fluent with the periods these days, so always find it difficult to gauge what level a casual reader can interpret!
Smith609Talk
Try to avoid using the same first word in successive sentences. For example, Appearance section, first paragraph, the second and third sentence both start with "They..." which makes reading repetitive.
YDone
Appearance section, first paragraph, fourth sentence (Starting with "The range and complexity...") is very long and complex. Consider breaking it up into two sentences?
YDone
Same section and paragraph, last sentence. Saying "This may be a genuine phenomenon..." implies that layers in the walls of the fossils might NOT actually occur. I think what you mean is "This layered structure may be a result of the preservational process or it may have been part of the live structure of the organisms."? Does that get at what was meant?
YDone
Please give a QUICK explanation of what "Test (biology)" means. Readers shouldn't have to click through to see what a phrase means, especially one that is a different usage of a word they are familiar with.
YDone
Probably the historian in me, but when exactly was Eisenack's work first published classifying these organisms?
YDone - work in 1930, pub 1931 - now in text.
Classification section, the sentence starting "They have, however, since been revised as scientic advances..." is very complex. Consider rewording, perhaps to "Since Esinack's original classification advances in science have made construction of a "natural order" more feasible. This order is based on appearance of distinctive traits in disparate groups and reflects relatedness rather than just similarity of traits."
YDone
Young graptolites. Is there a "pre-sicula" stage wikilink?
YDone - link to morphology section of "Graptolite", which is the closest we can do.
Same section, sixth sentence, do you mean preparation techniques for examining the fossils?
YDone - clarified
Same section last sentence, I suggest replacing "Further doubt must creep in ..." with "Further doubt creeps in when..." which strikes me as less POV
YDone
Eggs section, last sentence of the second paragraph, it's opinion and needs a citation.
YDone
Ecology section, first sentence, I suggest changing "...and several lines of argument must be invoked to approach an answer." with "...several arguments have been advanced to find an answer." which seems less POV and didactic to me.
None of these redirect links has a relevant landing page - I've linked to their dictionary definitions at wiktionary, although definitions are provided in the article already so I'm not sure how helpful that is.
Smith609Talk
That works, although you could always add them to you "pages to do" list (grins).
Ealdgyth -
Talk 12:35, 19 May 2008 (UTC)reply
Quick explanation of rayleigh number in the sentence it's in?
YDone - Hope it's comprehensible
Ecology section, fourth paragraph, last sentence is opinion and needs a citation.
YDone
Same section, fifth paragraph, "Amazingly, ..." remove amazingly as it's not NPOV, it's a peacock term.
YDone
Same section, sixth sentence, perhaps change "deepish" "deeper"?
YDone
External links usually go after the References.
I feel they're better before, because casual readers are likely to find them useful and may miss them if they have to scan past references, which readers usually access via the hyperlinks.
Smith609Talk
At GA, it's certainly a style choice, and one I won't hold the article back for. Just note that if you plan to take it to FAC, you'll probably be asked to move it again.
Ealdgyth -
Talk 12:35, 19 May 2008 (UTC)reply
Consider moving a few more images over to the left hand of the page to avoid the appearance of pictures marching down the right hand side of the page.
This is a stylistic choice - I always think that having images on opposite sides makes an article look messy and harder to read, so I prefer them consistently on the right. I guess it's a matter of taste...
Smith609Talk
Same as above about GA and FAC. I believe the MOS says to stagger them, so at FAC they generally like to see them staggered.
Ealdgyth -
Talk 12:35, 19 May 2008 (UTC)reply
Thanks for the update - either were acceptable last time I looked, I hadn't noticed the amendment.
A very nice article, and does a pretty decent job of explaining things to a non-specialist. I've put the article on hold for seven days to allow folks to address the issues I've brought up. Feel free to contact me on my talk page, or here with any concerns, and let me know one of those places when the issues have been addressed. If I may suggest that you strike out, check mark, or otherwise mark the items I've detailed, that will make it possible for me to see what's been addressed, and you can keep track of what's been done and what still needs to be worked on.
Ealdgyth -
Talk 15:55, 18 May 2008 (UTC)reply
Thanks a lot for your helpful review! I've acted upon most of your comments, and noted above my reasons for leaving a couple of parts as they are. I've probably not done a perfect job so feel free to point out anything else that could be tweaked! Thanks,
Smith609Talk 11:47, 19 May 2008 (UTC)reply
Looks great to me, passing it now.
Ealdgyth -
Talk 19:32, 19 May 2008 (UTC)reply
Brilliant. Thanks again for taking the time to review this article!
Smith609Talk 21:09, 19 May 2008 (UTC)reply
The text of the entry was: Did you know ...that eighty years on, scientists are still debating whether the
Palæozoicfossils known as Chitinozoans(
SEM image pictured) represent plants, animals or eggs?
This article is rated GA-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following
WikiProjects:
Chitinozoan 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
Talk:Chitinozoan is part of WikiProject Geology, an attempt at creating a standardized, informative, comprehensive and easy-to-use
geology resource. If you would like to participate, you can choose to edit this article, or visit the
project page for more information.GeologyWikipedia:WikiProject GeologyTemplate:WikiProject GeologyGeology 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
I've just gave a definition to start something. There's not a lot of information about (micro-)fossils in this encyclopedia. Feel free to edit and correct (language) mistakes!
The previous unsigned comment was left on 19:37, 27 September 2004 by
Georingo
I'd like to see the lead a little bit bigger. Right now it feels a bit skimpy for the density and size of the article. Consider putting in when they were discovered, something about Eisenack, a bit about their ecology, etc.
YDone
Why are they useful biostratigraphic markers? (from the lead).
Not sure I've understood this comment; I've expanded the lede in this respect, a full explanation is in the "Stratigraphic application" section.
For the non-biologist/paleontologist ... when exactly is the Ordovician? Pre dionosaur or after? (Hey, I study medieval history, you'd be as at sea if I just linked Anglo-Danish) An era would be nice.
I hope I've addressed this - I'm somewhat fluent with the periods these days, so always find it difficult to gauge what level a casual reader can interpret!
Smith609Talk
Try to avoid using the same first word in successive sentences. For example, Appearance section, first paragraph, the second and third sentence both start with "They..." which makes reading repetitive.
YDone
Appearance section, first paragraph, fourth sentence (Starting with "The range and complexity...") is very long and complex. Consider breaking it up into two sentences?
YDone
Same section and paragraph, last sentence. Saying "This may be a genuine phenomenon..." implies that layers in the walls of the fossils might NOT actually occur. I think what you mean is "This layered structure may be a result of the preservational process or it may have been part of the live structure of the organisms."? Does that get at what was meant?
YDone
Please give a QUICK explanation of what "Test (biology)" means. Readers shouldn't have to click through to see what a phrase means, especially one that is a different usage of a word they are familiar with.
YDone
Probably the historian in me, but when exactly was Eisenack's work first published classifying these organisms?
YDone - work in 1930, pub 1931 - now in text.
Classification section, the sentence starting "They have, however, since been revised as scientic advances..." is very complex. Consider rewording, perhaps to "Since Esinack's original classification advances in science have made construction of a "natural order" more feasible. This order is based on appearance of distinctive traits in disparate groups and reflects relatedness rather than just similarity of traits."
YDone
Young graptolites. Is there a "pre-sicula" stage wikilink?
YDone - link to morphology section of "Graptolite", which is the closest we can do.
Same section, sixth sentence, do you mean preparation techniques for examining the fossils?
YDone - clarified
Same section last sentence, I suggest replacing "Further doubt must creep in ..." with "Further doubt creeps in when..." which strikes me as less POV
YDone
Eggs section, last sentence of the second paragraph, it's opinion and needs a citation.
YDone
Ecology section, first sentence, I suggest changing "...and several lines of argument must be invoked to approach an answer." with "...several arguments have been advanced to find an answer." which seems less POV and didactic to me.
None of these redirect links has a relevant landing page - I've linked to their dictionary definitions at wiktionary, although definitions are provided in the article already so I'm not sure how helpful that is.
Smith609Talk
That works, although you could always add them to you "pages to do" list (grins).
Ealdgyth -
Talk 12:35, 19 May 2008 (UTC)reply
Quick explanation of rayleigh number in the sentence it's in?
YDone - Hope it's comprehensible
Ecology section, fourth paragraph, last sentence is opinion and needs a citation.
YDone
Same section, fifth paragraph, "Amazingly, ..." remove amazingly as it's not NPOV, it's a peacock term.
YDone
Same section, sixth sentence, perhaps change "deepish" "deeper"?
YDone
External links usually go after the References.
I feel they're better before, because casual readers are likely to find them useful and may miss them if they have to scan past references, which readers usually access via the hyperlinks.
Smith609Talk
At GA, it's certainly a style choice, and one I won't hold the article back for. Just note that if you plan to take it to FAC, you'll probably be asked to move it again.
Ealdgyth -
Talk 12:35, 19 May 2008 (UTC)reply
Consider moving a few more images over to the left hand of the page to avoid the appearance of pictures marching down the right hand side of the page.
This is a stylistic choice - I always think that having images on opposite sides makes an article look messy and harder to read, so I prefer them consistently on the right. I guess it's a matter of taste...
Smith609Talk
Same as above about GA and FAC. I believe the MOS says to stagger them, so at FAC they generally like to see them staggered.
Ealdgyth -
Talk 12:35, 19 May 2008 (UTC)reply
Thanks for the update - either were acceptable last time I looked, I hadn't noticed the amendment.
A very nice article, and does a pretty decent job of explaining things to a non-specialist. I've put the article on hold for seven days to allow folks to address the issues I've brought up. Feel free to contact me on my talk page, or here with any concerns, and let me know one of those places when the issues have been addressed. If I may suggest that you strike out, check mark, or otherwise mark the items I've detailed, that will make it possible for me to see what's been addressed, and you can keep track of what's been done and what still needs to be worked on.
Ealdgyth -
Talk 15:55, 18 May 2008 (UTC)reply
Thanks a lot for your helpful review! I've acted upon most of your comments, and noted above my reasons for leaving a couple of parts as they are. I've probably not done a perfect job so feel free to point out anything else that could be tweaked! Thanks,
Smith609Talk 11:47, 19 May 2008 (UTC)reply
Looks great to me, passing it now.
Ealdgyth -
Talk 19:32, 19 May 2008 (UTC)reply
Brilliant. Thanks again for taking the time to review this article!
Smith609Talk 21:09, 19 May 2008 (UTC)reply