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
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Arthropods, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of arthropods 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.ArthropodsWikipedia:WikiProject ArthropodsTemplate:WikiProject ArthropodsArthropods articles
Latest comment: 3 years ago5 comments2 people in discussion
I think that this article has a somewhat cluttered presentation of images, and perhaps more images than are really needed. I think the article needs some expansion of the text and reorganization of the images. Some of the images could probably be removed—do we really need the appendages of Caryosyntrips to be figured twice? Do we really need a depiction showing the reinterpretation of Parapeytoia as a megacheiran? Do we really need a diagram of every hurdiid carapace? These images would be great in an appropriate context (e.g. that last image should be on the page for Hurdiidae), but it seems excessive to have all of them on this page. I'm bringing this up here because I don't want to simply remove content from a page for mere presentation concerns without discussion. Also, perhaps there could be a table on this page presenting key information about all radiodont species with their frontal appendages figured in one of the columns? That might be a neater and more organized way to present the diversity of frontal appendages than the numerous images currently scattered across the page. Ornithopsis (talk) 18:59, 7 August 2020 (UTC)Reply
Thank you for your opinion, I'm the one who add those images to this article. I try to add multiple images in related sections for persuasiveness, but as you mention the presentation is cluttered. Your suggestion would be a better solution. Additionally, I think some fossil images could be removed as well if any diagrams/reconstructions with better resolution on its morphology is presented in the same section. --Junnn11 (talk) 06:19, 8 August 2020 (UTC)Reply
Thank you for being understanding of my concerns. I'll probably do some reorganizing of some of the images; I'll try not to remove anything that seems important. As for images of fossils, I think it's important to have the actual fossils depicted as well as reconstructions and diagrams, but some of those could probably be moved to the history of study section. I have used the page Cetiocaridae as a test run for the kind of table of species I'm talking about, in case you're wondering what I have in mind. Ornithopsis (talk) 17:47, 12 August 2020 (UTC)Reply
Thank you for the table. In case that's necessary, I'll provide images of frontal appendages each featuring single species from the assembled diagrams of Anomalocaris, Amplectobelua, Ramskoeldia and Lyrarapax.--Junnn11 (talk) 15:53, 13 August 2020 (UTC)Reply
That would be helpful, thank you! Ornithopsis (talk) 15:55, 13 August 2020 (UTC)Reply
