Talk:Babakotia

	; Archives (Index) ;
	1;
	This page is archived by ClueBot III.

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Babakotia article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Archives: Index, 1: 90 days

Babakotia is a featured article; it (or a previous version of it) has been identified as one of the best articles produced by the Wikipedia community. Even so, if you can update or improve it, please do so.

This article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page as Today's featured article on September 6, 2018.

Article milestones
Date	Process	Result
February 25, 2010	Good article nominee	Listed
March 8, 2010	Featured article candidate	Promoted

A fact from this article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the "Did you know?" column on March 5, 2010.

The text of the entry was: Did you know ... that the discovery of Babakotia radofilai, an extinct species of sloth lemur, helped to resolve the relationship between the indriids, sloth lemurs, and monkey lemurs?

Current status: Featured article

Primates Mid‑importance

	Primates portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Primates, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Primates on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PrimatesWikipedia:WikiProject PrimatesTemplate:WikiProject PrimatesPrimate articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Africa: Madagascar Low‑importance

	Africa portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Africa, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Africa on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.AfricaWikipedia:WikiProject AfricaTemplate:WikiProject AfricaAfrica articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	Madagascar portal This article is supported by WikiProject Madagascar (assessed as Low-importance).

Palaeontology Low‑importance

	Paleontology portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Palaeontology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of palaeontology-related topics and create a standardized, informative, comprehensive and easy-to-use resource on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PalaeontologyWikipedia:WikiProject PalaeontologyTemplate:WikiProject PalaeontologyPalaeontology articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Extinction Low‑importance

	This article is a part of WikiProject Extinction, an attempt at creating a standardized, informative, comprehensive and easy-to-use resource on extinction and extinct organisms. If you would like to participate, you can choose to edit this article, or visit the project page for more information.ExtinctionWikipedia:WikiProject ExtinctionTemplate:WikiProject ExtinctionExtinction articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the importance scale.

GA Review[edit]

This review is transcluded from Talk:Babakotia/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

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

Comments:

Why do you cite Nowak and McKenna and Bell for the authorities for Babakotia, and not just the original description?

Will be adding more as I read through. Ucucha 14:49, 25 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

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)[reply]

I see your point, so let's just keep it as it is. Ucucha 15:36, 25 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I put two things inline, and have one more query:

"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.

Ucucha 15:36, 25 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

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)[reply]

Thanks, that resolves those points. I am not satisfied yet with these two sentences:

"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).<ref name="NaturalChange6" /><ref name="NaturalChange8" /> Also in intermediate form were its highly mobile hip and ankle joints, as well as other specializations in the vertebral column, pelvis, and limbs."

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)[reply]

Hopefully the latest fixes have sufficiently addressed this problem. – VisionHolder « talk » 19:23, 25 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

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