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.
I see a few places with paragraphs ending without references, but I'm not sure what "no general references" means. I believe the GA nominator,
Smokeybjb, is inactive, but perhaps someone else from the paleo project can step in.
FunkMonk (
talk)
15:48, 1 February 2023 (UTC)reply
General references are when multiple paragraphs are cited to one citation. No general references means that there is none of those meaning the article is likely uncited.
Onegreatjoke (
talk)
16:02, 1 February 2023 (UTC)reply
About general references:
WP:GA? specifies that not all statements require inline citations. You're allowed to have a list of citations at the end of the article. De facto for
WP:GAN, we do seem to demand inline citations for most statements.
Femke (alt) (
talk)
16:05, 1 February 2023 (UTC)reply
Still not sure I understand the issue; is it that citations are bundled together at the end of paragraphs? That few citations are used more than once? Either way, I haven't encountered such styles to be a problem even at FAC.
FunkMonk (
talk)
21:23, 1 February 2023 (UTC)reply
FunkMonk, no general references isn't a problem. There are just a few uncited passages (e.g. the paragraph ending "Embolomeres are now identified as reptiliomorphs distantly related to temnospondyls", or the " simplified taxonomy of temnospondyls showing currently recognized groups", and a couple of others). Should be easy to fix, if you can find suitable sources.
~~ AirshipJungleman29 (
talk)
00:41, 2 February 2023 (UTC)reply
Pinging
Koskinonodon, who recently (~one year ago) expanded the article massively and may have comments. Personally, I would hardly characterize the amount of uncited material as "large", and the overall article quality is actually somewhat above average for palaeontology GAs. Lythronaxargestes (
talk |
contribs)
22:16, 1 February 2023 (UTC)reply
Weak keep Some uncited passages are now cited. I think compliance with
WP:V is compromised by
WP:overcitation in places. Mostly in
Temnospondyli#Cranium. Some paragraphs are too long to comfortably read for non-academically schooled people (1a). Overall, I would ask for more work in this state for a pass in GAN, but would not want to delist either.
Femke (alt) (
talk)
07:56, 7 February 2023 (UTC)reply
weak keep the article looks good, though I would say it has too many citations, like [22][23][24][25][26][27] or [40][41][42][43][44][45], but it's not an obstacle for GA. Another problem is that class tree in Classification looks extremely ugly and unreadable on mobile, would suggest some change to it but I honestly don't know how to fix that.
Artem.G (
talk)
13:34, 9 February 2023 (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.