And I would agree, were it not that there are quite a number of fossils of the other australopithecines iirc, and that these purportedly fall outside those fossils.
Large for a hominin species, but not really that large in an absolute sense. I tried to find some more specific numbers, but that proved a lot harder to do than I expected.
Anyway, as we (or, at least, I) don't have a subscription to
Nature, so don't actually know how different these fossils are from
Australopithecus afarensis, I guess we can leave it to the experts to argue over for now, as you suggest!
Edited by caffeine, : No reason given.