Talk:Chrompodellid
Chrompodellid is currently a Biology and medicine good article nominee. Nominated by —Snoteleks (Talk) at 13:09, 7 March 2024 (UTC) An editor has indicated a willingness to review the article in accordance with the good article criteria. Further reviews are welcome from any editor who has not contributed significantly to this article (or nominated it), and can be added to the review page, but the decision whether or not to list the article as a good article should be left to the first reviewer. Short description: Clade of alveolates |
This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
GA Review[edit]
GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
- This review is transcluded from Talk:Chrompodellid/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.
Nominator: Snoteleks (talk · contribs) 13:09, 7 March 2024 (UTC)
Reviewer: Reconrabbit 21:57, 6 June 2024 (UTC)
Good Article review progress box
|
(Non-reviewer comment) How useful is it to include red links to the carotenoids vaucheriaxanthin and isofucoxanthin? The latter doesn't seem to have much documentation in literature due to the prevalence of fucoxanthin. Reconrabbit 14:37, 6 June 2024 (UTC)
- @Reconrabbit Red links in general allow people to see what content is still absent in Wikipedia and is supposed to encourage them to fill in the gaps of knowledge. However it is true that perhaps isofucoxanthin is the same as fucoxanthin, I haven't delved that deep. — Snoteleks (talk) 14:58, 6 June 2024 (UTC)
- I can see the validity of including links to Chilovora, percolomonads, and the other taxa that haven't been created yet. It's just that these compounds seem less likely to be filled (and I've been discouraged from including red links in reviews of my GAs in the past, though this may just be reviewer preference). Reconrabbit 15:56, 6 June 2024 (UTC)
- @Reconrabbit: Do you mind taking over? I don't think I can provide a review. Wolverine XI (talk to me) 16:58, 6 June 2024 (UTC)
- Okay. Do you want me to change the "reviewer" heading? I can start on this in a bit. Reconrabbit 17:13, 6 June 2024 (UTC)
- Yes please. I'm extremely busy. Wolverine XI (talk to me) 21:44, 6 June 2024 (UTC)
- Okay. Do you want me to change the "reviewer" heading? I can start on this in a bit. Reconrabbit 17:13, 6 June 2024 (UTC)
- @Reconrabbit I think it is a preference, other times I've heard the opposite. It's always more important that the links are relevant, though — Snoteleks (talk) 17:05, 6 June 2024 (UTC)
- @Reconrabbit: Do you mind taking over? I don't think I can provide a review. Wolverine XI (talk to me) 16:58, 6 June 2024 (UTC)
- I can see the validity of including links to Chilovora, percolomonads, and the other taxa that haven't been created yet. It's just that these compounds seem less likely to be filled (and I've been discouraged from including red links in reviews of my GAs in the past, though this may just be reviewer preference). Reconrabbit 15:56, 6 June 2024 (UTC)
- Good article nominees
- Good article nominees on review
- C-Class Protista articles
- Mid-importance Protista articles
- WikiProject Protista articles
- C-Class Algae articles
- Low-importance Algae articles
- WikiProject Algae articles
- C-Class Microbiology articles
- Low-importance Microbiology articles
- WikiProject Microbiology articles