Talk:Yantaromyrmex

Yantaromyrmex has been listed as one of the Natural sciences good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it. Review: October 17, 2015. (Reviewed version).

A fact from Yantaromyrmex appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know column on 24 February 2015 (check views). The text of the entry was as follows: Did you know... that the fossil ant genus Yantaromyrmex (pictured) is found in four amber deposits in Europe? A record of the entry may be seen at Wikipedia:Recent additions/2015/February. The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Yantaromyrmex.

This article is rated GA-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Palaeontology Low‑importance 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. Insects: Ants Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Insects, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of insects 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.InsectsWikipedia:WikiProject InsectsTemplate:WikiProject InsectsInsects articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. This article is supported by Ant task force (assessed as Low-importance). Europe Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Europe, an effort to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to European topics of a cross-border nature on Wikipedia.EuropeWikipedia:WikiProject EuropeTemplate:WikiProject EuropeEurope articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

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

Reviewer: FunkMonk (talk · contribs) 22:13, 16 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• I'll review this one. FunkMonk (talk) 22:13, 16 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for taking this on.

• Perhaps an image like this could be interesting in the history section?[1]

Y Added.

• "relatives of either an Agathis relative or a Pseudolarix relative" Sounds a bit clumsy with the "relative of a relative"

Y Chopped down slightly.

• "The species described in 2013," Why are these mentioned by date under distribution, when the other species aren't?

Y Removed from distribution, but added info in history and classification.

• History could need a line break, instead of being a wall of text.

Y Done.

• "were collected over 125 years ago" This is a meaningless recentism, as the article here will remain for many years. Better to mention the approximate date. It occurs twice in the article

Y Used date.

• "All the Y. samlandicus type specimens" What is meant here, that they were part of a syntype series?

Y Yes (based on a recent source that mentions many syntype workers). Clarified.

• Nothing on behaviour and ecology?

Unfortunately no. I have been looking through pretty much all available sources and no author has discussed the behaviour and ecology of these ants.

Wait, yes there is! Found some material in the most frequently used source all this time.

Y Added sentence. It's brief, but it's better than nothing about a group of ants that hardly anyone knows about.

Nice, but perhaps it should be added to the section about the species, as single line sections are discouraged. FunkMonk (talk) 09:07, 17 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, done.

• There are many technical terms under description that could need some kind of explanation in parenthesis.

Will look through the description.

Clarified and linked some technical terms.

• "The antennae have a scape which just passes the back-edge of the head capsule and both female and ergatomorphic (male) workers." Not sure what the bolded part has to do with the rest of the sentence. Did you mean on instead of and?

• fixed--Kevmin § 02:47, 17 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• "The solitary worker of Y. intermedius" What is meant by this, that it is the only specimen of the species? Then "only specimen of" or some such would be clearer.

Y Yeah, there's only a holotype available. Did small tweak.

Now it isn't clear that the holotype is the only specimen, though... FunkMonk (talk) 09:07, 17 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Fixed. I just used your suggestion.

• You only provide the etymology of some species names.
  • No sources etymologies for the species Wheeler described, since he did not provide any. Giving any now with out sources is OR.--Kevmin § 02:39, 17 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
• No cladogram?

None available, though I'm not surprised since this genus was only established two years ago and the last detailed study involving the phylogeny of Dolichoderinae was five years ago (which, by the way excluded the extinct taxa).

Okay, I have addressed your final comments, so can you do some double checking just in case I have made any potential errors or you aren't completely satisfied? Cheers, Burklemore1 (talk) 14:59, 17 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Additions look fine, so I'll pass! FunkMonk (talk) 15:03, 17 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Excellent, thank you for initiating the review! Burklemore1 (talk) 15:20, 17 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]