Talk:Dvulikiaspis

Dvulikiaspis 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: August 13, 2019. (Reviewed version).

Arthropods Low‑importance

	Arthropods portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Arthropods, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of arthropods 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.ArthropodsWikipedia:WikiProject ArthropodsTemplate:WikiProject ArthropodsArthropods articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Palaeontology Low‑importance

	Paleontology portal 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
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Dvulikiaspis/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Casliber (talk · contribs) 11:00, 11 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I'll take a look. I will make straightforward changes as I go and jot queries below. Please revert if I accidentally change the meaning. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 11:00, 11 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

~~Its prosoma (head) was subquadrate (almost quadrate)~~~~.....err, this doesn't help a lay reader..."almost square"?~~

Changed.

~~There was a small consecutive increase in length until....~~ ~~- I think "There was a small progressive increase in length until ..." is more natural here~~

Changed.

~~In paleoecology, is there anything at all that can be added to possible environment from the strata or associated species?~~

I don't think so. That formation seems to have received very little attention.

that's a shame...Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 05:07, 13 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Also, I am thinking about the intro -now I fancy myself as knowing a bit about prehistoric critters and I'd never heard of Chasmataspidida until reading this article. I think the intro can be more engaging and accessible if it was written something like:

"Dvulikiaspis is a genus of extinct aquatic arthropod that flourished during the Early Devonian period (Lochkovian epoch). Initially described as a new species of the eurypterid Stylonurus in 1959, not until 2014 that it was recognised as belonging to a different order—the chasmataspidida - this gives the novice reader some context.

Chasmataspidida is a pretty obscure clade, I neither did know about it before Wikipedia, but I am attracted to its similarity with Eurypterida and I find it interesting. I always follow a type of format for all my articles, and the leads usually have a specific order (first what it is, what it means and where the genus is located, then its description and finally history, classification, etc.). This is explained anyway in the third paragraph of the lead.

ok fair enough. not a deal-breaker anyway and I guess folks can just follow the blue links Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 05:07, 13 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

~~Otherwise~~ there is little to complain about. A nice read. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 11:40, 11 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

1. Well written?:

Prose quality:

Manual of Style compliance:

2. Factually accurate and verifiable?:

References to sources:

Citations to reliable sources, where required:

No original research:

3. Broad in coverage?:

Major aspects:

Focused:

4. Reflects a neutral point of view?:

Fair representation without bias:

5. Reasonably stable?

No edit wars, etc. (Vandalism does not count against GA):

6. Illustrated by images, when possible and appropriate?:

Images are copyright tagged, and non-free images have fair use rationales:

Images are provided where possible and appropriate, with suitable captions:

Overall:

Pass or Fail:

Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 05:10, 13 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the review! Super Ψ Dro 08:55, 13 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]