# Talk:Malagasy hippopotamus

Very few researchers study the extinct malagasy hippopotamus!  This is nearly every academic paper ever written about them! --JayHenry 06:43, 5 August 2007 (UTC)

Shouldn't the article be split, though? It seems to be an unnatural grouping. FunkMonk (talk) 14:16, 1 March 2012 (UTC)

Overall, the article is very well written and well studied. Quite impressive. I believe it overall meets the Good Article criteria, and have promoted to to GA status. There are a couple areas where it could be improved, however, which could help the article achieve featured status. First, the lead could be improved to provide a better summary of the article as a whole. Ideally, a sentence or two on each of the major topics the article will discuss should be in the lead. There also shouldn't be any references here, either (since it's a summary, the references should be included later on in the article). Please review WP:LEAD for more information on writing a good lead section for an article.
Also, looking at the external link provided at the end of the article [1], I noticed two bits of information that probably should be mentioned somewhere:

That the dwarf hippo probably "came to the island [Madagascar] about 1,6 million years ago."
"The skeleton indicates that the animal lived mainly on land, while the recent African Hippoes live mainly in rivers and lakes."
Some photos of fossils, or possibly illustrations, could also improve the article further.
But overall, these are suggestions for getting the article up to FA standards. I don't think the lack of this would prevent GA status, as the article is already very well written and well researched. Cheers! Dr. Cash 19:12, 12 August 2007 (UTC)

This discussion is transcluded from Talk:Malagasy Hippopotamus/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the reassessment.


### GA Sweeps: Kept
As part of the WikiProject Good Articles, we're doing Sweeps to go over all of the current GAs and see if they still meet the GA criteria. I went through the article and made various changes, please look them over. I believe the article currently meets the criteria and should remain listed as a Good Article. Altogether the article is well-written and is still in great shape after its passing in 2007. Continue to improve the article making sure all new information is properly sourced and neutral. It would be beneficial to update the access dates for the sources. If you have any questions, let me know on my talk page and I'll get back to you as soon as I can. I have updated the article history to reflect this review. --Happy editing! Nehrams2020 (talk • contrib) 06:05, 12 July 2009 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Malagasy hippopotamus. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070705225334/http://www.mountainecology.org/IBEX3/pdf/Art_Capitolo1/Taxonomy_Conservation.pdf to http://www.mountainecology.org/IBEX3/pdf/Art_Capitolo1/Taxonomy_Conservation.pdf
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 22:58, 11 January 2017 (UTC)

@FunkMonk: proposed the splitting of this article into species articles.

Split to the species to maintain consistency with all other paleontology articles.--Kevmin § 17:19, 31 July 2019 (UTC)
Yes, this is not even a taxon, but a term covering a geographical area, like saying "European elephant" or something. FunkMonk (talk) 17:59, 31 July 2019 (UTC)
Split per FunkMonk. Rlendog (talk) 16:00, 24 October 2019 (UTC)