482:"Forfarella is a poorly preserved genus only known from one single specimen, and it has not been included to date in any phylogenetic analysis or cladogram." Since the first part of the sentence has alreayd been stated, I think you could rephrase it sop that its imperfectness comes afterwards as a cause. For examp0e "Forfarella has not been included in any phylogenetic analysis or cladogram to date due to it only being known from a single, poorly preserved specimen"
42:
538:("do not combine different parts of one source to reach or imply a conclusion not explicitly stated by the source"), where a cause and effect is implied by the juxtaposition of the information. So the best we can do is to look at how the source puts it. If it does not put this information close together, we probably shouldn't either?
512:
Yes, it does imply that, but indirectly. I didn't claim anywhere that this is indeed the reason why it has not been added to any phylogenetic analysis; I'm letting the reader figure it out for themselves as the sources don't say it directly. I don't know if I'm making my point understood, but I think
267:
There are only two places where the use of the binomial name is not completely necessary, in the description and in its image. In the image I would prefer to make clear what species it is in case a new one is described and simply because I usually specify it in the images of other articles. This last
497:
Isn't the first part of the sentence then implying that's the reason why it has not been included? That's how I read it, and probably how most would, so maybe "Forfarella is a poorly preserved genus only known from one single specimen" should be removed since it's repetitive anyway, and may create a
603:"This also suggests that other diploaspidids similar to Diploaspis, such as Achanarraspis or Forfarella, could have specimens from earlier times" It is a bit odd to tay that a taxon has specimen, instead you could say that there could be specimens of these genera from earlier times.
420:
By Dunlop, Anderson and Braddy. I would rather avoid mentioning them until the last paragraph as there is where they are most relevant. I added "in a subsequent study", but maybe if you prefer it, I could use "in a 1999 study"
489:
That is a good idea, but then I would be directly indicating that this is the reason why it has not been included in any phylogenetic analysis. Braddy 2017 just says something like "A number of
Devonian taxa such as and
513:
that removing the first half of the sentence and leaving the rest would make it a bit weird and inadequate for a single paragraph. I think that what we have now is the best that can be achieved.
332:
I wanted to look at the original description before answering this and it turns out that it says that the carapace details are not preserved... I've rewritten the sentence.
80:
617:"The single and type species, F. mitchelli, is known from one single specimen" The double "single" is a bit repetitive, how about "the type and only species"?
70:
253:
Hmm, I think it's best to be consistent for clarity and to make it easier to follow for the reader, unless there is a specific reason to use the binomial.
673:"It was very small, only reaching 1.7 centimetres (0.67 inches) of length." Should probably come first instead of last in the intro description paragraph.
47:
392:
Because that refers to the fossil, while the rest to the animal. I was not quite sure if it was correct when I wrote that, maybe there is a better way.
184:
Thanks for picking this article! Chasmataspidids are pretty similar to eurypterids, although you might get a bit confused by the different morphology.
747:
558:
519:
274:
190:
737:
Great, thanks for the review! Lately I have changed my edit focus, so it is unlikely that I will nominate many more for now... except for
126:
712:
I think it is a bit excessive for a genus, and I have only come across very technical definitions that cannot be easily summarized...
385:"Vague impressions distinguish the second, third and fourth tergites" Why present tense when all the surrounding text is past tense?
719:
Alright, that's all from me, will promote! Hope we'll see more odd prehistoric arthropods at GAN and FAC, I've been missing them!
52:
122:
75:
156:
107:
752:
563:
524:
279:
195:
534:
If the short paragraph is the issue, why not just merge it into the one underneath? My concern is that is now a bit like
225:
Perhaps even state in the infobox caption that it's the only known specimen? Like "holotype and only known specimen of"?
99:
624:
Done, I have preferred to change it in the second mention of "single" to avoid altering the link of "type species".
325:"Although the details on its surface are little preserved" Say "Altough few details on its surface are preserved"?
468:"Forfarella coincided with these features" Not sure if coincided is the right word, "possessed these features?"?
239:
Since the focus is the genus, shouldn't you refer to it mainly as
Forfarella instead of the binomial throughout?
742:
553:
514:
269:
185:
666:
I think the sentence is correct, I can only think of "used to swim with actively" and that sounds wrong to me.
374:
Done. I preferred to keep mentioning "subtrapezoidal" since it is apparently a diagnostic characteristic of
268:
thing also applies to the beginning of the description. I think the rest of the mentions are neccessary.
367:"subtrapezoidal (nearly as a trapezoid)" Nearly trapezoidal might flow better might the preceding.
724:
543:
503:
360:
Chasmataspidids in general are ridiculously small in size, so I thought it wouldn't be necessary.
258:
210:
171:
150:
297:"with the size of its only known specimen" The only specimen would probably sound more natural.
166:
I know absolutely nothing about these animals, so I hope I'll learn something by reviewing!
535:
461:
I'm actually surprised that I didn't link it earlier. It is now mentioned in the lead too.
115:
17:
652:
I used "with its eyes being unknown but maybe represented by a tubercle in the fossil".
447:, unfortunately this is not specified in any academic article and I cannot include it.
720:
586:
539:
499:
254:
206:
205:
I learned most of what i know form eurypterids from reviewing articles here, hehe...
167:
146:
399:"Location of Arbroath, a town near of which the" Near where might sound better...
645:"with unknown eyes" Sounds a bit cryptic, how about just "its eyes are unknown"?
454:
Link
Diploaspididae in the article body? I'm sure it will be created one day...
705:
You could maybe briefly explain what a chasmataspidid is under classification?
92:
631:"south of Arbirlot" State again outside the intro that this is a village.
757:
728:
568:
547:
529:
507:
284:
262:
214:
200:
175:
160:
413:" it was concluded that the Kelly Den stream section" By who and when?
444:
311:"estimated at only 1.7 centimetres (0.67 inches)." Add "in length".
659:" that Forfarella used to swim actively" Missing "with" somewhere.
552:
Fair enough. I've merged the sentence in the rest of the article.
353:
No size diagram? Not that it's necessarily needed for all taxa...
250:", but I like to alternate a bit with the binominal one.
134:
103:
596:
I was sure that a page like that had to exist! Linked.
494:
have not been included in any phylogenetic analysis".
741:, which I will finish probably in early November.
687:"meaning that it lived in a lake." Probably not
8:
439:refers to the fossil collector Mitchell and
30:
61:
33:
246:The most used name in the article is "
7:
24:
443:probably refers to the city of
585:"(i.e. a "ghost" range)" Link
1:
758:09:38, 27 October 2020 (UTC)
729:23:12, 26 October 2020 (UTC)
569:22:44, 26 October 2020 (UTC)
548:22:32, 26 October 2020 (UTC)
530:22:25, 26 October 2020 (UTC)
508:00:27, 26 October 2020 (UTC)
285:13:36, 25 October 2020 (UTC)
263:02:56, 25 October 2020 (UTC)
215:02:56, 25 October 2020 (UTC)
201:11:35, 24 October 2020 (UTC)
176:02:34, 24 October 2020 (UTC)
161:02:34, 24 October 2020 (UTC)
776:
498:misleading conclusion?
428:What do the names mean?
691:lake, but in lakes?
89:
88:
767:
755:
750:
745:
566:
561:
556:
527:
522:
517:
282:
277:
272:
198:
193:
188:
139:
130:
111:
43:Copyvio detector
31:
775:
774:
770:
769:
768:
766:
765:
764:
753:
748:
743:
564:
559:
554:
525:
520:
515:
435:I am sure that
280:
275:
270:
196:
191:
186:
120:
97:
91:
85:
57:
29:
22:
21:
20:
18:Talk:Forfarella
12:
11:
5:
773:
771:
763:
762:
761:
760:
732:
731:
716:
715:
714:
713:
707:
706:
702:
701:
700:
699:
693:
692:
684:
683:
682:
681:
675:
674:
670:
669:
668:
667:
661:
660:
656:
655:
654:
653:
647:
646:
642:
641:
640:
639:
633:
632:
628:
627:
626:
625:
619:
618:
614:
613:
612:
611:
605:
604:
600:
599:
598:
597:
591:
590:
582:
581:
580:
579:
578:
577:
576:
575:
574:
573:
572:
571:
484:
483:
479:
478:
477:
476:
470:
469:
465:
464:
463:
462:
456:
455:
451:
450:
449:
448:
430:
429:
425:
424:
423:
422:
415:
414:
410:
409:
408:
407:
401:
400:
396:
395:
394:
393:
387:
386:
382:
381:
380:
379:
369:
368:
364:
363:
362:
361:
355:
354:
350:
349:
348:
347:
341:
340:
339:Link tubercle.
336:
335:
334:
333:
327:
326:
322:
321:
320:
319:
313:
312:
308:
307:
306:
305:
299:
298:
294:
293:
292:
291:
290:
289:
288:
287:
241:
240:
236:
235:
234:
233:
227:
226:
222:
221:
220:
219:
218:
217:
179:
178:
140:
87:
86:
84:
83:
78:
73:
67:
64:
63:
59:
58:
56:
55:
53:External links
50:
45:
39:
36:
35:
28:
25:
23:
15:
14:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
772:
759:
756:
751:
746:
740:
736:
735:
734:
733:
730:
726:
722:
718:
717:
711:
710:
709:
708:
704:
703:
697:
696:
695:
694:
690:
686:
685:
679:
678:
677:
676:
672:
671:
665:
664:
663:
662:
658:
657:
651:
650:
649:
648:
644:
643:
637:
636:
635:
634:
630:
629:
623:
622:
621:
620:
616:
615:
609:
608:
607:
606:
602:
601:
595:
594:
593:
592:
588:
587:ghost lineage
584:
583:
570:
567:
562:
557:
551:
550:
549:
545:
541:
537:
533:
532:
531:
528:
523:
518:
511:
510:
509:
505:
501:
496:
495:
493:
488:
487:
486:
485:
481:
480:
474:
473:
472:
471:
467:
466:
460:
459:
458:
457:
453:
452:
446:
442:
438:
434:
433:
432:
431:
427:
426:
419:
418:
417:
416:
412:
411:
405:
404:
403:
402:
398:
397:
391:
390:
389:
388:
384:
383:
377:
373:
372:
371:
370:
366:
365:
359:
358:
357:
356:
352:
351:
345:
344:
343:
342:
338:
337:
331:
330:
329:
328:
324:
323:
317:
316:
315:
314:
310:
309:
303:
302:
301:
300:
296:
295:
286:
283:
278:
273:
266:
265:
264:
260:
256:
252:
251:
249:
245:
244:
243:
242:
238:
237:
231:
230:
229:
228:
224:
223:
216:
212:
208:
204:
203:
202:
199:
194:
189:
183:
182:
181:
180:
177:
173:
169:
165:
164:
163:
162:
158:
155:
152:
148:
145:
141:
138:
137:
133:
128:
124:
119:
118:
114:
109:
105:
101:
96:
95:
82:
79:
77:
74:
72:
69:
68:
66:
65:
60:
54:
51:
49:
46:
44:
41:
40:
38:
37:
32:
26:
19:
739:Pruemopterus
738:
688:
491:
440:
436:
375:
247:
153:
143:
142:
135:
131:
117:Article talk
116:
112:
93:
90:
81:Instructions
698:Yeah, done.
610:Sure, done.
104:visual edit
492:Forfarella
441:Forfarella
376:Forfarella
248:Forfarella
48:Authorship
34:GA toolbox
437:mitchelli
144:Reviewer:
71:Templates
62:Reviewing
27:GA Review
721:FunkMonk
540:FunkMonk
536:WP:synth
500:FunkMonk
421:instead.
406:Changed.
255:FunkMonk
207:FunkMonk
168:FunkMonk
157:contribs
147:FunkMonk
76:Criteria
127:history
108:history
94:Article
445:Forfar
744:Super
680:Done.
638:Done.
555:Super
516:Super
475:Done.
346:Done.
318:Done.
304:Done.
271:Super
232:Done.
187:Super
136:Watch
16:<
725:talk
544:talk
504:talk
259:talk
211:talk
172:talk
151:talk
123:edit
100:edit
754:Dro
565:Dro
526:Dro
281:Dro
197:Dro
727:)
546:)
506:)
261:)
213:)
174:)
159:)
125:|
106:|
102:|
749:Ψ
723:(
689:a
589:.
560:Ψ
542:(
521:Ψ
502:(
378:.
276:Ψ
257:(
209:(
192:Ψ
170:(
154:·
149:(
132:·
129:)
121:(
113:·
110:)
98:(
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.