Talk:Xiphodon/GA1

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

Nominator: 23:17, 6 March 2024 (UTC)

Reviewer: SilverTiger12 (talk · contribs) 18:25, 16 June 2024 (UTC)

I have surfaced from my long catnap slumber and have taken up the task of reviewing this article.
 * This article is stable.
 * This article has no tags or banner requesting clean-up.
 * This article is highly unlikely to contain copyvio according to Eargwig.
 * It is broad in its coverage- yes, this article likely summarizes everything known about this relatively obscure taxon.
 * It is illustrated; all images are tagged with their respective licenses.
 * Everything is cited to reliable sources, which are formatted correctly and linked where possible. There's a bunch of Biodiversity Library links for the older ones, which is nice.

Now for the hard part, actually reading the article:
 * Lede:
 * I made some changes but the prose overall still feels a bit clunky. But the lede overall is of a good length and hits the high points of the article.

(More to come...)

Continuance: It's really close to GA, honestly, you've gotten better at writing in general. SilverTiger12 (talk) 21:09, 21 June 2024 (UTC)
 * Bold the Xiphodon mention in the cladogram
 * Link tympanic bullae in Description.
 * Why is the relevant? Do you mean they have the same or similar morphology there?
 * While I'd recommend giving it a close copyedit for clarity and sentence length overall, everything is understandable if you pay enough attention so I have no issues with the prose.


 * Thanks, and I implemented your suggestions. PrimalMustelid (talk) 21:25, 21 June 2024 (UTC)