Talk:Amargasaurus/GA1

GA Review[edit]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

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

Reviewer: IJReid (talk · contribs) 20:02, 14 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I'll get on this Jens Lallensack. Overall the article looks good but I have a few comments and there are a few grammatical errors. IJReid ^discuss 20:02, 14 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

"Strikingly" should be removed, seems slightly unencyclopedic (sorry I forgot the word I would use to describe it).
What is "mid-height"? within so many meters of the ground? or about even with the back?
As with the above, change "which suggest a habitual position of the snout some 80 cm above the ground" to "which suggests a habitual position of a lowered neck" or some such.
I'd move the "for sauropod standards" outside brackets and to the end of the sentence.
Just a suggestion, but instead of having references mid-sentence I prefer to order them all at the end of the sentence. I you think otherwise just mention it.
"It followed the typical sauropod bauplan, with a long tail and neck, a small head, and a barrel-shaped trunk supported by four column-like legs. The neck of Amargasaurus was proportionally short for sauropod standards, as in other members of the Dicreosauridae." is self-contradictory
"It measured" should be changed to "The neck measures".
Link anatomical terms like convex, sacral vertebrae, adjacent, and dorsal vertebrae
"It likely showed a horselike" I'd change to "Based on close relatives it likely showed..."
Do you approve of these edits?

That's it for now. IJReid ^discuss 20:02, 14 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi IJReid, thanks for the comments, you made some very good points, and I think I should have fixed everything by now. Do you have any further comments? --Jens Lallensack (talk) 20:10, 15 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I'd say that the rest looks quite good, but you might want to explain "penultimate" (second last). IJReid ^discuss 02:21, 16 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hm I'm not sure. "Penultimate" and "adjacent" are not really anatomical terms, I once learned them in my English classes in School as being part of the standard vocabulary. I don't really want to "translate" them into simpler terms, since Wikipedia wants to provide a high language standard, and since the "simple Wikipedia" written in simple English already exists. --Jens Lallensack (talk) 15:41, 16 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Honestly, when I first heard the term "penultimate", I had to look it up to know what it meant. I agree with you that adjacent is fine, but how about you link to wiktionary:penultimate. Before I pass the article, I will give it a look for improvements before FAC. IJReid ^discuss 16:46, 16 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, you know better than me of course, its linked to Wiktionary now. --Jens Lallensack (talk) 17:28, 16 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Ah I see: "penultimate" is much more common in Britain than in America (although it exists there as well). What I learned was British Englisch. --Jens Lallensack (talk) 18:14, 16 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Yah, that makes sense. IJReid ^discuss 19:55, 16 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Final look:

I would use template:convert for all measurements, as it shows the conversion from metric to imperial for americans. IJReid ^discuss 19:55, 16 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

After this final suggestion is completed, this article can pass. IJReid ^discuss 20:38, 16 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Done Dunkleosteus77 ^{(push to talk)} 03:38, 17 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.