# Talk:Telonemia

What is the proper way to describe this article as lacking appropriate sentence flow (paragraph 4, seeming more like it was copied directly from somewhere else rather than typed for formal article writing)?  --Thenewguy34 (talk) 00:50, 19 September 2017 (UTC)

See doi:10.1093/molbev/msz012/5298736 – new phylogenetic analysis. Peter coxhead (talk) 10:17, 26 January 2019 (UTC)

This review is transcluded from Talk:Telonemia/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.
Reviewer: Esculenta (talk · contribs) 17:54, 31 January 2024 (UTC)
Hi Snoteleks, I'll review this article. Will have comments up in a day or two. Esculenta (talk) 17:54, 31 January 2024 (UTC)

@Esculenta Thanks! —Snoteleks (Talk) 07:41, 1 February 2024 (UTC)
@Esculenta Hey there, I made all the changes you requested except for one. Unfortunately I was not able to find anything for Telonema's etymology. Also, the proboscis and rostrum thing is very confusing, perhaps even deserving of its own article since many protists are described as having a 'rostrum' structure. Lastly, yes, phylogenetic distance and genetic distance are the same. Again, thank you so much for taking the time to review this article. Let me know if you think of anything else I could improve for the nomination. —Snoteleks (Talk) 21:57, 4 February 2024 (UTC)
Not an expert, but I think rostrum may be a general term for "beak-like structure"; it's also used in mycology. Esculenta (talk) 16:18, 5 February 2024 (UTC)
Here are my thoughts about this GA candidate:
Lead

The lead is very brief and jargony and needs work to make it more accessible for laypeople. Take for example the third sentence:
"They present characteristics similar to their sister group, the SAR supergroup, such as cortical alveoli, tripartite mastigonemes and filopodia." How about something more explanatory like

"Telonemia shares several distinctive features with its related group, the SAR supergroup. Among these features are cortical alveoli, small sacs beneath the cell's surface that act as cushions, providing support and helping to maintain the cell's shape. Additionally, they possess tripartite mastigonemes, complex three-part hair-like structures on their flagella, the whip-like tails used for movement. These structures enhance their swimming capabilities by increasing resistance against water. Furthermore, Telonemia is equipped with filopodia, very thin, thread-like projections extending from the cell body. These projections can serve various purposes, such as aiding in movement or capturing food particles by wrapping around them." Something like this would help the layreader to understand what this article is about without having to click through several links to gather the necessary background information.
"… where they prey on bacteria and small phytoplankton through phagotrophy." per above, maybe "… where they prey on bacteria and small phytoplankton by engulfing them in their plasma membrane (phagotrophy)."
link Telonema rivulare, interference contrast micrography, genera, Cavalier-Smith (in taxobox)
Morphology

at the beginning of this section, maybe it would be a good idea to write "Phylum Telonemia" (instead of just the name itself) for some subconscious reassurance that the text that follows applies specifically to the phlyum (the phylum and class and named so similarly and are potentially confusing). Along these lines, does the common name "telonemids" apply to phylum Telonemia, or more specifically to order Telonemida?
link/gloss pyriform, diversity, morphologically
is "proboscis" the same as "short rostrum", or are these distinct anatomical features? Confusing with no links …
watch out for phrases like "They present" and "they exhibit" as they have a distinct chatbot flavor. "They have" is a perfect replacement. "Surprisingly" is another word the bot likes to use, but should be avoided here (see MOS:EDITORIAL).
I'd like to see some mention of organism size in the article, preferably a known range of smallest to largest of the seven species in the group, but at the very least the size of at least a single member of the phylum.
Ecology and distribution

link: lineage, environmental sequence, aquatic ecosystem
to flesh out this section a bit more, perhaps it could mention where the environmental sequences were obtained from. I read from the source that at least one of the new species is from the deep sea, which I though was an interesting fact not mentioned.
this article (doi:10.1128/AEM.02737-14) says "several phylotypes of Telonemia favored open waters with lower nutrients such as the Canada Basin and offshore of the Mackenzie Shelf." and later "Such distributions suggest that Telonemia have an advantage in low-productivity systems and are able to maintain high populations of one or a few phylotypes"
Systematics

since the phylum is ultimately named after the genus, could we have the etymology of the genus name?
"…to contain this genus of protists." since the genus was monotypic (I'm assuming from species publication dates later), it wasn't a genus of protists, so perhaps "…to contain this protist genus." would be a better way to express it.
typo: "presence fo two"
"Since 2006, they were treated" new paragraph, so not completely clear what "they" refers to
link phylogenetic (and molecular phylogenetics later if that is what was used for analysis); is "phylogenetic distance" the same as "genetic distance"?
link formally described
Evolution

link clade, Cladogram, electron micrography
"Telonemia has a pivotal position in the tree of eukaryotic life." "pivotal" is another descriptor that sounds like chatbot oversell

Other GA criteria:
article is stable
both images are relevant to the topic, have suitable captions, and are appropriately licensed
sources are scholarly
spot checks of a couple of sources shows the sources backs up cited material with no other issues
Completely outside the scope of this GA, but it would be nice if the classification of Telonema matched up with this article :)
another thing: Telonemea, Telonemida, and Telonemidae all redirect here and are subjects of this article, so they need to be mentioned (with names bolded) in the lead. Esculenta (talk) 02:48, 5 February 2024 (UTC)
Change done. —Snoteleks (Talk) 11:55, 5 February 2024 (UTC)
Ok, changes look good; I think the article meets the GA criteria and am promoting now. Esculenta (talk) 16:18, 5 February 2024 (UTC)
Excellent, thanks a lot. —Snoteleks (Talk) 16:24, 5 February 2024 (UTC)