Talk:Homo habilis/GA1

GA Review

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch

Reviewer: Enwebb (talk · contribs) 19:20, 28 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

H. habilis was proposed as being a human ancestor simpler without "being"

"proposed to have been" User:Dunkleosteus77 |push to talk 19:54, 28 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

- Same here as more fossil elements and species were being unearthed

done User:Dunkleosteus77 |push to talk 19:54, 28 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The body proportions of H. habilis are only known from 2 highly fragmentary skeletons, and is based largely on assuming a similar anatomy subject/verb disagreement; "is" should be "are"

done User:Dunkleosteus77 |push to talk 19:54, 28 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I wouldn't consider "diet" as a subsection of culture. In the article Human it is a subsection of "Biology"

Human is hardly a C-class article, and in Neanderthal (at GA) I put it under Culture User:Dunkleosteus77 |push to talk 19:54, 28 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Oxford defines "culture" as the arts and other manifestations of human intellectual achievement regarded collectively or the customs, arts, social institutions, and achievements of a particular nation, people, or other social group. Is there a word other than "culture" you could use here? What about "behavior"? Enwebb (talk) 21:18, 28 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

culture encompasses social behaviors and norms of a society. In anthropology, a creature which produces tools is considered to have material culture (the Oldowan is a culture), and so the term culture has to be used here. Consequently, group dynamics as well as other behaviors are listed under Culture. This convention is also used in the GAs Homo naledi, Homo luzonensis, Homo rudolfensis, and Homo ergaster User:Dunkleosteus77 |push to talk 23:30, 28 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

a partial juvenile skull and hand and foot bones unclear which ones are partial. It could be, "A partial skull, as well as hand and foot bones" if that is what you mean.

the hand and foot bones are also partial User:Dunkleosteus77 |push to talk 19:54, 28 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, then the meaning is still unclear. Why not "partial skull, hand bones, and foot bones"? Why is "and" necessary twice? Enwebb (talk) 21:04, 28 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

"partial skull bones" sounded incorrect. Done User:Dunkleosteus77 |push to talk 23:30, 28 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Were the Leakeys a husband/wife team? You only mention Jonathan but then go on to say "discovered by the Leakeys' senior assistant Heselon Mukiri in 1959" which indicates more than one Leakey. I now see this is addressed in the next sentence, but the order is confusing. You could say, "...were discovered by Heselon Mukiri in 1959, who was a senior assistant of Louis and Mary Leakey (Jonathan's parents)."

done User:Dunkleosteus77 |push to talk 19:54, 28 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

After description, it was hotly debated if H. habilis should be reclassified into Australopithecus africanus (the only other early hominin known at the time), in part because the remains were so old and at the time Homo was presumed to have evolved in Asia (with the australopithecines having no living descendants), and the brain size was smaller than what Wilfrid Le Gros Clark proposed in 1955 when considering Homo quite a long sentence. Can it be broken up?

done User:Dunkleosteus77 |push to talk 19:54, 28 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

- Same To address this, in 1985, English palaeoanthropologist Bernard Wood proposed that the comparatively massive skull KNM-ER 1470 from Lake Turkana, Kenya, discovered in 1972 and assigned to H. habilis, actually represented a different species,[8] now referred to as Homo rudolfensis, but it is also argued that instead it represents a male specimen whereas other H. habilis specimens are female.

done User:Dunkleosteus77 |push to talk 19:54, 28 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

You use both Ma and mya. I would stick with one.

Ma is adjective format User:Dunkleosteus77 |push to talk 19:54, 28 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

What's the methodology of the cladogram? Morphology? You could tack on a bit at the end, "based on x".

there isn't one, it's just an example of a potential tree. There is absolutely 0 resolution when it comes to early hominins User:Dunkleosteus77 |push to talk 15:07, 1 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

features less ancestral, or basal, traits I read "features" as a noun here and not a verb, which would make sense but for the "traits" at the end. Maybe just "has" so that confusion is avoided

done User:Dunkleosteus77 |push to talk 15:07, 1 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Great use of media overall

I try my best User:Dunkleosteus77 |push to talk 15:07, 1 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

What are your sources for the African hominin timeline?

added User:Dunkleosteus77 |push to talk 16:24, 1 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

from australopithecines brain size I think should be either australopithecine brain size, using as an adjective, or australopithecines' brain size, using as plural possessive.

"australopithecine brain size" User:Dunkleosteus77 |push to talk 15:07, 1 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The pattern of striations on the teeth of OH 65 slanting right could indicate right handedness, could you make the connection here a bit more clear to the reader--how handedness could result in a certain striation pattern

done User:Dunkleosteus77 |push to talk 15:07, 1 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

partially arboreal lifestyle in the trees "in the trees" is redundant here

it's supposed to gloss arboreal User:Dunkleosteus77 |push to talk 15:07, 1 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

However, the foot has projected toe bone and compacted mid-foot joint structures, which restricts rotation in the hind and front parts of the foot and is implicated in the plantar arch elastic spring mechanism which generates energy while running (but not walking). can this be rephrased? Or perhaps split apart? I'm not really following the meaning

done User:Dunkleosteus77 |push to talk 15:07, 1 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

it is highly difficult to speculate with accuracy "speculate with accuracy" is a bit oxymoronic, perhaps "correctly identify"

"to speculate with any confidence" User:Dunkleosteus77 |push to talk 15:07, 1 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

correlate between polygyny with a high degree and monogamy with a low degree based on general trends high degree and low degree of what?

done User:Dunkleosteus77 |push to talk 15:07, 1 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

but early hominins possess probably possessed?

No, anatomically early hominins possess some traits that align with humans and some traits that align with various other apes (it's also the reason why there's basically no resolution) User:Dunkleosteus77 |push to talk 15:07, 1 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I meant verb tense. Do you think it should be "possess" or "possessed"? Enwebb (talk) 02:46, 3 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The left foot OH 8 seems to have been bitten off by a crocodile the left foot "of" OH 8? Or is OH 8 the severed foot?

it's just a foot (here's a picture) User:Dunkleosteus77 |push to talk 15:07, 1 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

What are knappers?

one who knaps. I thought it was a common word, should I change it to something else? User:Dunkleosteus77 |push to talk 15:07, 1 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I would link and gloss at first usage. I have never seen that word before. Enwebb (talk) 02:46, 3 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

done User:Dunkleosteus77 |push to talk 13:44, 3 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Checked for copyvio. Only hits were mirrors.
All media licensed appropriately.
Neutral, stable, broad Y

Optional

high quantities of meat I would use "large" there, but I don't know that high is wrong.
I think it's considered more "proper" to begin sentences with the full genus name rather than an abbreviation. This is not a sticking point for GA, but something to consider.

I have never seen that convention used ever User:Dunkleosteus77 |push to talk 19:54, 28 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Just because you have never ever seen it doesn't mean it isn't a convention for some It's part of several style guides to not begin sentences with abbreviations. That specific convention is listed in several places.

American Fisheries Society "References to a genus that has already been mentioned may be abbreviated unless they occur at the beginning of a sentence"
Editage.com "However, it is better to spell out the genus in full at the beginning of a sentence."
IMA Style Guide pg 6, Beginning of sentence: spell out genus;
Enago Academy "There are a few exceptions to some of these rules. First, the entire genus name must be spelled out if it begins a sentence, even if a subsequent reference";

Like I said, optional. Enwebb (talk) 21:03, 28 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

5 years earlier numbers less than 10 usually written out MOS:NUMERAL

personally I like seeing numbers than written out because my brain can more easily identify 5 than five User:Dunkleosteus77 |push to talk 15:10, 1 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I'll come back to this tomorrow, sorry for delay. Enwebb (talk) 02:58, 31 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Not gonna lie, I actually forgot this review was already open User:Dunkleosteus77 |push to talk 18:43, 31 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]