Talk:Rhinocarcinosoma

Rhinocarcinosoma 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: July 30, 2021. (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:Rhinocarcinosoma/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Some Dude From North Carolina (talk · contribs) 00:25, 29 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

"portrusion" – typo?

Yeah, fixed. Ichthyovenator (talk) 16:32, 30 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

"and a slightly different" – is the "a" necessary?

Not really, removed. Ichthyovenator (talk) 16:32, 30 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

"Viatnamese" – typo

Fixed. Ichthyovenator (talk) 16:32, 30 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

"Reconsturction" – typo

Fixed. Ichthyovenator (talk) 16:32, 30 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Add a comma after "in turn".

Not sure that's correct, rephrased instead. Ichthyovenator (talk) 16:32, 30 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Assessment

Comprehension: The comprehension is good.

Pass

Criteria	Notes	Result
(a) (prose)	The prose is generally clear, concise and understandable.	Pass
(b) (MoS)	The article is compliant with the manual of style.	Pass

Verifiability: The article is verifiable.

Pass

Criteria	Notes	Result
(a) (references)	The article has a list of references and in-line citations for its contents in the body.	Pass
(b) (citations to reliable sources)	Sources used are reliable.	Pass
(c) (original research)	No original research found.	Pass
(d) (copyvio and plagiarism)	No flagrant copyright issues found.	Pass

Comprehensiveness: The article is comprehensive.

Pass

Criteria	Notes	Result
(a) (major aspects)	The article broadly covers all major aspects.	Pass
(b) (focused)	The article is focused without unnecessary deviations.	Pass

Neutrality: The article is neutral.

Pass

Notes	Result
The article is compliant with the policy on neutral point of view.	Pass

Stability: The article is stable.

Pass

Notes	Result
No ongoing content disputes or edit wars present.	Pass

Illustration: The article is well illustrated.

Pass

Criteria	Notes	Result
(a) (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales)	No copyright issues found, images are appropriately tagged.	Pass
(b) (appropriate use with suitable captions)	Use and caption are good.	Pass