Template talk:Taxonomy/Lepidosauria

Template:Taxonomy/Lepidosauria is permanently protected from editing because it is a heavily used or highly visible template. Substantial changes should first be proposed and discussed here on this page. If the proposal is uncontroversial or has been discussed and is supported by consensus, editors may use {{edit template-protected}} to notify an administrator or template editor to make the requested edit. Any contributor may edit the template's sandbox. This template does not have a testcases subpage. You can create the testcases subpage here.

Template-protected edit request on 25 July 2025

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

Add this ref: Herrera-Flores, Jorge A.; Stubbs, Thomas L.; Elsler, Armin; Benton, Michael J. (2018-04-06). "Taxonomic reassessment of Clevosaurus latidens Fraser, 1993 (Lepidosauria, Rhynchocephalia) and rhynchocephalian phylogeny based on parsimony and Bayesian inference". Journal of Paleontology. 92 (4): 734–742. doi:10.1017/jpa.2017.136. ISSN 0022-3360. Jako96 (talk) 16:42, 25 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Not done for now: This editor has been making numerous questionable edit requests for taxonomy templates. I will leave this open for another editor, possibly User:Jts1882, to examine. – Jonesey95 (talk) 21:53, 25 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

What is questionable? I just wanted to add a reference for the superorder rank. I don't understand. Jako96 (talk) 11:15, 26 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Completed – reference citation double-checked. P.I. Ellsworth , ed. – welcome! – 19:11, 26 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for accepting my "questionable" edit. Jako96 (talk) 19:15, 26 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

TEs are not necessarily PhDs in ToL matters, so please don't take it personally. I've also noted the sometimes questionable nature of your requests and have had to seek out editors whom I know are much more knowledgable than I am. Happy to help! Paine 19:22, 26 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Proposal for always display

I propose to always display Lepidosauria. Just like Sauropterygia, Ichthyopterygia and Parareptilia. Jako96 (talk) 11:52, 27 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose That would display Lepidosauria in the taxoboxes of >10,000 extant reptile articles where it is not needed. — Jts1882 | talk 12:29, 27 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Taxoboxes, like other infoboxes, are meant to summarize. A very good case is needed to use always display. I don't see the case being made here. Peter coxhead (talk) 17:14, 28 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]