Talk:Kaikaifilu/GA1

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

Reviewer: Etriusus (talk · contribs) 04:05, 12 August 2023 (UTC)

Grabbing review, I'll probably get notes out tomorrow. I haven't reviewed the article yet, but I see a fresh maintenance tag. Care to explain? 🏵️ Etrius ( Us) 04:05, 12 August 2023 (UTC)


 * I don't know, apparently, i've used some too scientificaly terms when i was describing the animal. But i think that will be corrected soon by me after reviewing. Amirani1746 (talk) 05:53, 12 August 2023 (UTC)

Images

 * All rights are in order
 * Captions look good
 * I am willing to accept most user generated images, but what's the authority on "File:Kaikaifilu.png" how do you know this is an accurate depiction?

Copy-Vios

 * Nothing of note, Earwig and spot-checks clear

Misc

 * MOS:SEEALSO- repetitive links
 * Nominator is main author
 * Page is stable enough, main author has made sizeable edits in the last few days

Prose
Lead Discovery and naming Description Classification Paleoecology
 * "The only species known" its a monotypic genus
 * "very incomplete specime" vague wording
 * "The maximum size of the animal..." run-on sentence
 * "would therefore be about 10 m (33 ft) long" clarify that this is an approximate
 * "the animal" specify
 * " waters where temperatures may have dropped below freezing." very verbose way of saying this, simplify. Also, make sure to say that it living in an environment with surface ice, this implies at Kaikaiflu got frozen solid.
 * "fishes" change to fish
 * "Kaikaifilu was among the last known mosasaurs. " among the last to what?
 * "cataloged SGO.PV.6509" change to 'cataloged as'
 * " in the beds dating from" awkward wording
 * "and the humerus being well defined" awkward wording
 * "outcropping at the surface, and badly weathered" reword for an encyclopedic tone
 * "These fragments were collected by sieving the mud, being easily recognizable due to their yellowish color." is this sentence necessary, seems a bit WP:UNDUE, simplify and merge with next sentence
 * "been constantly altered" specify
 * "indicating that they come from the same concretion" how? Idea is rather disconnected
 * "chapter of a scientific work" and "A new anatomical revision" WP:WEASEL
 * "considered it as a mosasaur of the tylosaurine subgroup" awkward wording
 * "that Otero and his colleagues described and officially named it in 2016" improper grammar
 * "an important contribution" unclear term
 * "suggesting a total length of 1.1–1.2 cm (0.43–0.47 in), based on the skull of Taniwhasaurus antarcticus" clean-up this, clarify that the length was estimated by looking at similar species. This reads rather awkwardly.
 * "This, however, depends on the classification of the species" what does this mean?
 * "with researchers noting the state of their preservation" vague meaning, seems repetitive
 * "Even some preserved cranial parts are incomplete, thus preventing any definite assessment." more repetition
 * "The frontals extend forward and between the external nostrils, being in contact with the pineal foramen" reword sentence, add a transition that we're now talking about the skull
 * "The latter is slightly concave" that latter what?
 * "Its suture with the premaxilla and the prefrontal is extended axially and without interdigitation." again, not sure what this is referring to
 * "the frontal shows abundant roughness" frontal what?
 * "interdigitated" WP:TECHNICAL
 * Comment: Okay, I'm just gonna stop here with this paragraph (Due to the poor preservation...). It needs a substantial rewrite.
 * "estimates suggest that more than 15 teeth should be present in each dentary bone" what does this mean? Clarify.
 * "include some common points" unclear statement
 * "They are conical in shape, have labial and lingual surfaces with smooth ridges extending from base to apex, lack serrated anterior keels, and have a triangular-shaped lateral profile with crowns slightly curved backwards" WP:TECHNICAL
 * "the animal' don't use this term, be specific
 * "mosasaurine Eremiasaurus" wrong capitalization
 * "The only other mosasaur known to have an heterodont dentition is the mosasaurine Eremiasaurus, also from the late Maastrichian, but from present-day Morocco." confusing sentence structure
 * "only known from the proximal half, but is very robust" vague meaning, WP:PUFFERY
 * "The articular head has a tall, rectangular and dorso-ventrally broad pre-glenoid process" unreadable jargon
 * "but could not determine whether the latter was a representative of a new taxon or not" vague sentence
 * "almost all the common features of the group are not present on them" vague
 * "In addition, some observed characteristics do not seem to correspond to the definition of the group" vague
 * "namely the exclusion of the frontal from the margin of the orbit" vague
 * "However, due to some missing or contradictory traits and the very fragmentary nature of the fossils, subsequent research conducted on tylosaurines cannot include it in their classifications" what is 'it', what is 'their classification'?
 * "All strict consensus methods" WP:WEASEL
 * "basal position" WP:TECHNICAL
 * "In the study officially describing it" sorta a WP:WEASEL
 * 'parsimonious' just use 'conservative'
 * 65°S can you give something more specific
 * "temperatures at medium to large water depths would have been around 6 °C (43 °F) on average, while sea surface temperatures may have dropped below freezing and sea ice possibly formed at times" Specify that this was during the time Kaikaiflu existed, not some vague period in the past.
 * 'This formation' specify
 * 'distribution trends' clarify what this is

Comment: This article plays what I like to call "the pronoun game", where pronouns are overly used to the point of the sentence losing all understanding. It's a surprisingly common mistake by new editors. I know that you understand what you mean, but keep in mind that the general layperson might not. Likewise, there is a ton of technical jargon that can be simplified. I've done my best to give detailed notes, but these are the most egregious examples and not an exhaustive list. I haven't even done an exhaustive source review yet.

I am going to have to fail this article at this time. The article needs a serious overhaul and the description section needs something close to a full rewrite. If you have any questions, please ping me, I'm more than happy to field questions. 🏵️ Etrius ( Us) 05:26, 14 August 2023 (UTC)