User talk:Amhmdyasr
I’ve just reverted your mass addition of this category to various extinct animal pages. While I aunderstand that you did it out of good faith, I would like to say that it simply doesn’t align with Wikipedia conventions. “Fossil taxa described in xxxx” categories are only added to genus pages based on the description year of the genus name, not the year when a singular species within the genus is described. I hope you understand. 49.144.192.24 (talk) 16:18, 12 May 2023 (UTC)
- I disagree with this statement by the IP. Wikiproject:Paleontology practice is to treat both species and genera in combined articles, and as such the addition of this category is valid. Can the IP cite what guidelines they are referencing with the above comment? --Kevmin § 17:24, 12 May 2023 (UTC)
- I’m not sure if there’s a written guideline, but I’ve noticed the pattern of categories across extinct genus articles of all kinds (e.g. Tarchia, Tupuxuara, Dolichorhynchops, Smilodon), so it seems like the consensus to me. Also, while I do agree that genus and species-related content should be in the same article, I personally find that it makes more sense to only include the genus authorship in the categories, because it would be confusing for example to see the article named Omeisaurus under “Fossil taxa described in 2020”, because the name of the listing only mentions the genus Omeisaurus which was described in 1939. 49.144.192.24 (talk) 17:38, 12 May 2023 (UTC)
- You're sample size is small though and highly vertebrate centric, moving out if the "shiny" large verts, the trend you are citing breaks down. Where would you put the category, given that the species are only being discussed at the article in question that covers both genus/species. Readers should be able to notice that a species has been described in 2023 and thus qualifies as being a Category:Fossil taxa described in 2023 entry. As for your Omeisaurus example, the article is not just on the genus, it "should" also cover the details of the 8 species spanning 1939-2021, and so should be noted in the respective categories.--Kevmin § 20:06, 12 May 2023 (UTC)
- It’s not just vertebrates; the genus year is only listed on Arthropleura and Walliserops too. 49.144.192.24 (talk) 02:10, 13 May 2023 (UTC)
- You're sample size is small though and highly vertebrate centric, moving out if the "shiny" large verts, the trend you are citing breaks down. Where would you put the category, given that the species are only being discussed at the article in question that covers both genus/species. Readers should be able to notice that a species has been described in 2023 and thus qualifies as being a Category:Fossil taxa described in 2023 entry. As for your Omeisaurus example, the article is not just on the genus, it "should" also cover the details of the 8 species spanning 1939-2021, and so should be noted in the respective categories.--Kevmin § 20:06, 12 May 2023 (UTC)
- I’m not sure if there’s a written guideline, but I’ve noticed the pattern of categories across extinct genus articles of all kinds (e.g. Tarchia, Tupuxuara, Dolichorhynchops, Smilodon), so it seems like the consensus to me. Also, while I do agree that genus and species-related content should be in the same article, I personally find that it makes more sense to only include the genus authorship in the categories, because it would be confusing for example to see the article named Omeisaurus under “Fossil taxa described in 2020”, because the name of the listing only mentions the genus Omeisaurus which was described in 1939. 49.144.192.24 (talk) 17:38, 12 May 2023 (UTC)
Speedy deletion nomination of Category:Cnidaria described in 2023
[edit]
A tag has been placed on Category:Cnidaria described in 2023 indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.
If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and removing the speedy deletion tag. Liz Read! Talk! 21:40, 3 July 2023 (UTC)
Speedy deletion nomination of Thermal melanism hypothesis
[edit]
If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.
You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.
Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. This is a notice to inform you that a tag has been placed on Thermal melanism hypothesis requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A3 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is an article with no content whatsoever, or whose contents consist only of external links, a "See also" section, book references, category tags, template tags, interwiki links, images, a rephrasing of the title, a question that should have been asked at the help or reference desks, or an attempt to contact the subject of the article. Please see Wikipedia:Stub for our minimum information standards for short articles. Also please note that articles must be on notable subjects and should provide references to reliable sources that verify their content.
If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. Fram (talk) 15:28, 18 April 2025 (UTC)