Talk:Babakotia/GA1

GA Review
The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.''

Reviewer: Ucucha 14:49, 25 February 2010 (UTC)

Comments: Will be adding more as I read through. Ucucha 14:49, 25 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Why do you cite Nowak and McKenna and Bell for the authorities for Babakotia, and not just the original description?
 * Originally, when I first started putting the page together, I did cite the original article. However, I figured it would be better to cite a secondary source to confirm that they were the first to describe this new species.  I just figured that since no other articles I've seen have gone back to find the original publications, but instead point to taxonomic authorities, then I should point to the best secondary sources I could find.  If you'd strongly prefer to change the reference on that, just say so. –   VisionHolder  « talk »  15:14, 25 February 2010 (UTC)
 * I see your point, so let's just keep it as it is. Ucucha 15:36, 25 February 2010 (UTC)

I put two things inline, and have one more query: Ucucha 15:36, 25 February 2010 (UTC)
 * "In many ways, Babakotia radofilai has an intermediate  level of adaptations for suspensory behavior, not only between the large sloth  lemurs (Archaeoindris and Palaeopropithecus)  and the small sloth lemurs (Mesopropithecus),   but also between the sloth lemurs in general and the closely-related  indriids." - can't understand this. The first clause suggests we can  rank suspensory adaptations from most to least as  Archaeoindris/Palaeopropithecus - Babakotia - Mesopropithecus -  indriids, the second suggests A./P./M. - B. - indriids.
 * Changes have been made to clarify. Please review at your convenience.  Thanks, especially for the great copy edit! –   VisionHolder  « talk »  16:33, 25 February 2010 (UTC)

Thanks, that resolves those points. I am not satisfied yet with these two sentences: Is the second sentence about traits that are intermediate between sloth lemurs and indriids? If so, you can better swap the two sentences to keep thematically similar sentences together. The first sentence may also need recasting. Ucucha 18:31, 25 February 2010 (UTC)
 * "Similar to arboreal sloths (demonstrating convergent evolution), its forelimbs were 20% longer than its hind limbs, giving it a higher intermembral index (~119) than Mesopropithecus (~97 to 113). Also in  intermediate form were its highly mobile hip and ankle joints, as well  as other specializations in the vertebral column, pelvis, and limbs."
 * Hopefully the latest fixes have sufficiently addressed this problem. –  VisionHolder  « talk »  19:23, 25 February 2010 (UTC)

Good! That suffices to pass this as a GA. Ucucha 19:35, 25 February 2010 (UTC)