Edge Rewrite
// HTMLRewriter · presentation

This page was redesigned at the edge.

Cloudflare fetched the original article and streamed it through HTMLRewriter to apply an entirely new visual system without rebuilding the source page.

// request.cf · coarse context

A page that knows where it met you.

Only coarse request metadata is shown. This demo does not display or persist visitor IP addresses.

Country
US
Cloudflare location
CMH
Connection
HTTP/2
Language
Not provided

Ray ID: a25f05036afd4a3e

Jump to content

Talk:Rhinarium

Page contents not supported in other languages.
Add topic
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Latest comment: 16 years ago by Botteville in topic Plagiarism

Forward-facing eyes

[edit]

The presence of a rhinarium is associated with general features of the skull, especially the lateral placement of the eyes, and its absence with front-facing eyes

ummm, I'm not an anatomy expert, but don't dogs have forward facing eyes? I know they have a rhinarium and not an absence of one. Perhaps it should say "a tendency towards absence". Anyone who knows more should look at that.

This is indeed nonsense and so I've removed it. I think the author was perhaps trying to make the point that haplorrhines with their missing rhinarium rely more on vision than on smell, but haplorrhines are clearly not the only mammals with forward-facing eyes and while all primates are pretty visually inclined, they don't all lack a rhinarium. It's a shame Wikipedia has this kind of poor scholarship lying around. 79.68.223.68 (talk) 17:56, 13 May 2008 (UTC)Reply

Evolution of the rhinarium

[edit]

Can anyone find anything about the appearance of the rhinarium? Am I right in thinking it is a therian synapomorphy? Marsupials seem to have it, but having a duck bill like a platypus would seem to preclude its possession. Needs a source though. 79.68.223.68 (talk) 18:28, 13 May 2008 (UTC)Reply

Plagiarism

[edit]

The initial first sentence before I started work here was lifted word for word from Websters' Quotations, Facts and Phrases. Don't do that. What good is that? We don't need to repeat things that already repeated on the Internet dozens of times. I do see any advantage whatever. Why would you steal for us without getting anything for it? And then someone later has to fix it. You discredit Wikipedia and yourself for zero advantage, so why bother? Learn different habits, you'll like it better, I guarantee it.Dave (talk) 17:48, 13 January 2010 (UTC)Reply