Talk:Ceoptera

Ceoptera 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: May 3, 2026. (Reviewed version).

Amphibians and Reptiles: Pterosaurs Low‑importance

	Ceoptera is part of WikiProject Amphibians and Reptiles, an effort to make Wikipedia a standardized, informative, comprehensive and easy-to-use resource for amphibians and reptiles. If you would like to participate, you can choose to edit this article, or visit the project page for more information.Amphibians and ReptilesWikipedia:WikiProject Amphibians and ReptilesTemplate:WikiProject Amphibians and Reptilesamphibian and reptile
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by the Pterosaurs task force (assessed as Low-importance).

Palaeontology: Pterosaurs 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
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by the Pterosaurs task force (assessed as Low-importance).

Scottish Islands Low‑importance

	Scottish islands portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Scottish Islands, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of islands in Scotland 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.Scottish IslandsWikipedia:WikiProject Scottish IslandsTemplate:WikiProject Scottish IslandsScottish Islands
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

GA review

Latest comment: 1 month ago6 comments2 people in discussion

Passed. -- Zoo Blazer 17:32, 3 May 2026 (UTC)Reply

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.

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

Nominator: LittleLazyLass (talk · contribs) 01:38, 2 March 2026 (UTC)Reply

Reviewer: ZooBlazer (talk · contribs) 21:00, 29 April 2026 (UTC)Reply

Copyvio check

No issues from earwig

Infobox

The caption "Holotype of Ceoptera" is a bit brief. Since the image clearly displays blocks labeled A, B, and C, expanding the caption to something like "Blocks A, B, and C comprising the holotype of Ceoptera" would be more informative for readers.
Expanded.

Lead

In the second to last sentence, a colon should be used instead of a semicolon to introduce the list of traits: "...distinguished from all other pterosaurs by two traits: the large size of a wavy flange..."
Done.
Change "As one of the only pterosaur skeletons..." to "As one of the few pterosaur skeletons..."
Done.
Avoid repetition in "Belonging to the group Darwinoptera, a group intermediate..." by dropping the first "the group".
Reworded it so "group" is only used once.

Discovery and naming

The image caption "as well one of its outcrops" --> "as well as one of its outcrops"
Done.
- The caption also needs a period at the end since it is a complete sentence.
Huh, I had no idea about this MOS policy. Done.
In the first paragraph, "clifface" --> "cliff face"
Done.
A comma is needed after "England": "...to the Natural History Museum in London, England, as it was very fragile."
Done.
"The limestone matrix was especially hard, fossils within were very fragile; twelve months..." contains a comma splice. It should be "The limestone matrix was especially hard and the fossils within were very fragile; twelve months..."
Done.
"there is a paucity remains" --> "there is a paucity of remains".
Done.
"first mentioned in a 2019 conference abstract, later in a 2020 review" is slightly clunky. Maybe change to something like "first mentioned in a 2019 conference abstract, and later in a 2020 review".
Done.
"as well her role" --> "as well as her role".
Done.

Description

"was likely done growing when it died" leans a bit colloquial for an encyclopedia. Maybe revise to something like "was likely fully grown" or "had reached maximum size before death"
I try to dumb down description sections enough for lay readers, but this is fair. Done.

Distinguishing traits

The text mentions the flange is a likely site for the "intersection" of the m. sternocoracoideus muscle. In anatomical terminology, this should almost certainly be the "insertion" of the muscle.
Done - was always bad at muscles.
"...side of the process has is recessed in shape". Delete "has"
Done.
"more short" --> "shorter"
Done.

Comparative anatomy

"similar those of Kunpengopterus" --> "similar to those of Kunpengopterus"
Done.
When discussing the transverse process extensions, "presented" is slightly awkward in "...they are presented in the related Darwinopterus". Should probably be "present".
Done.
"elongate and constrict" --> "elongate and constricted"
Done.
"a portion of the unside of the claw" --> "a portion of the underside of the claw"
Done.

Classification

"performed a phylogenetic analysis in order to test its relationships" can be tightened to simply "performed a phylogenetic analysis to test its relationships".
Done.
"was considered to be strongly supported" is passive and wordy. Changing it to "was strongly supported" would make the sentence more direct.
I think it's best to present these sorts of things as conclusions of the respective studies/authors rather than absolutes as a rule, even though it's rather unambiguously a darwinopteran in this case. Removed "to be" though.
In the second paragraph, when discussing the fusion of the nasal and antorbital openings, "fenestra" should be pluralized to "fenestrae" since it refers to two distinct openings fusing into one.
Done.
"find that anatomical form to merely be a transitional stage..." --> "find that this anatomical form is merely a transitional stage"
Done.
The transition "Combined with other lines of evidence emerging in the 2010s and 2020s, its discovery is considered indicative that..." is a bit bloated with passive voice. It can be smoothed out to "Combined with other lines of evidence from the 2010s and 2020s, its discovery indicates that...".
Done.

Palaeoecology

"limestone dominated section" requires a hyphen as a compound modifier: "limestone-dominated section".
Done.
"During the Bathonian, it would have represented..." is slightly ambiguous because "it" technically points back to Ceoptera in the previous sentence. Change "it" to something like "this area" or "the formation".
Used "the formation".
"and expanded and dried out with the passage of wet and dry seasons" --> "expanding and drying out with the passage of wet and dry seasons."
Done.
"Insects fossils are not common" --> "Insect fossils are not common"
Done.
"include the choristodere Cteniogenys, and..." -->"include the choristodere, Cteniogenys, and..."
This seems wrong? It'd either be "a choristodere, Cteniogenys" or "include the choristodere Cteniogenys". The latter is using choristodere as an adjective to give context to what Cteniogenys is.
"Lizards include Bellairsia gracilis, Balnealacerta, and Parviraptor are also found in the formation" should be revised to something like "Lizards found in the formation include Bellairsia gracilis, Balnealacerta, and Parviraptor."
Done.
"neornithischiann" --> "neornithischian"
Done.

Other

Kilmaluag Formation, England, Early Jurassic, sternum, pelvis, and metacarpal all have WP:DUPLINKS
I do truly hate Wikipedia's duplink policy, but mostly implemented... I've kept the anatomical terms linked once per section, because many readers are likely to struggle with technical terminology and could be left confused if they elected to only read the description and not the history where these are first linked
I'd suggest adding alt text to all images, including the infobox image
Done.
All image captions that are complete sentences should have periods
Done.

Spot checks

Checked refs 1, 5, 9, 11, 12, 16. No issues. Ref numbers accurate as of

Overall the article doesn't have any major issues, mostly just some grammar and missing words. Great work. -- Zoo Blazer 21:00, 29 April 2026 (UTC)Reply

Implemented almost all changes, and responded to a couple I didn't fully agree with. LittleLazyLass (Talk | Contributions) 16:46, 3 May 2026 (UTC)Reply

@LittleLazyLass I have no issues with the disagreements. Great work with the article! -- Zoo Blazer 17:31, 3 May 2026 (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.

Add topic