Talk:Chiniquodon

(This information has been derived from [1] TRIASSIC CYNODONTS; Cynognathidae, Probainognathidae and ‘Allies’, an internet directory. As that's my webpage, there are no issues of copyright. Trevor Dykes)

Merge proposal: Probelesodon

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section. A summary of the conclusions reached follows.

The result of this discussion was merge. —Trilletrollet [ Talk | Contribs ] 23:17, 10 November 2021 (UTC)

---

The genus Probelesodon was synonymised with Chiniquodon by Abdala & Giannini (2002), and later papers such as Martínez et al. (2013), Martinelli et al. (2017) and Mocke et al. (2019) have generally accepted this synonymy. A few days ago, I merged the two articles, but this was reverted with no explanation. Do you think they should be merged? —Trilletrollet [ Talk | Contribs ] 21:28, 3 November 2021 (UTC)

@Magnatyrannus: do you have input? --awkwafaba (📥) 12:24, 4 November 2021 (UTC)

Id like to keep them as separate genera. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Magnatyrannus (talk • contribs) 21:06, 4 November 2021 (UTC)

@Magnatyrannus: But the scientific consensus is to treat them as synonyms. "Id like to keep them as separate genera" is not a valid argument; you must provide sources for your viewpoint. —Trilletrollet [ Talk | Contribs ] 23:54, 5 November 2021 (UTC)

@Awkwafaba: It's been a week, and no good arguments have been made against merging the pages. What should I do? —Trilletrollet [ Talk | Contribs ] 21:59, 10 November 2021 (UTC)

@Trilletrollet: Magnatyrannus is frankly an incompetent editor. I suggest ignoring his opinion and just merging. You have my approval. Hemiauchenia (talk) 22:57, 10 November 2021 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.