Content deleted Content added
→Result: Complete but for 2 items on hold to be cleared |
→Review: Text vs Graphics for Runcaria |
||
Line 97:
| '''(b)''' (appropriate use with suitable captions) || a) Representing ''A. afarensis'' as a skull when text is all about bipedalism and angle of femur is unhelpful if not inadequate; a photograph or diagram that shows the hip and femur, perhaps with a (walking) reconstruction. {{done}}
b) An image of ''Runcaria'' appears necessary - it will be less familiar to readers than ''Australopithecus'' or ''Archaeopteryx'', and the points made are quite technical (''anemophilous''); suggest a diagram, ideally comparing ''Runcaria'' with a modern seed. Depending on the image(s), the section text may need enhancement also.
c) It might be helpful to include a historic reconstruction image of ''Archaeopteryx'' in the 'History of transitional fossils' section - Commons has some - to show the impact of the 1861 find. In particular an image to show 'reptile with feathers' (ideally an early/Victorian reconstruction) would make the point clearly. {{done}}
| |||