Talk:Gravisauria
Latest comment: 23 hours ago by A Cynical Idealist in topic Merge proposal notice
 | This redirect does not require a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||||||
 | It is requested that an image or photograph be included in this article to improve its quality. Please replace this template with a more specific media request template where possible.
The Free Image Search Tool or Openverse Creative Commons Search may be able to locate suitable images on Flickr and other web sites. |
A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion edit
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:
Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 13:53, 2 July 2020 (UTC)
Merge proposal notice edit
- 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 singular support for the merge with no opposition. A Cynical Idealist (talk) 07:40, 27 May 2024 (UTC)
This article is involved in a larger merge proposal discussion taking place at WT:DINO. LittleLazyLass (Talk | Contributions) 21:49, 22 April 2024 (UTC)
- Support: Gravisauria, despite being a branch-based clade, only has 101 hits on google scholar, and is sometimes used interchangeably with different historical definitions of Sauropoda. Any discussion of gravisaurian systematics is functionally inseparable from those of sauropods in general, and thus does not warrant its own article. (WP:REDUNDANT, WP:N) -- A Cynical Idealist (talk) 07:37, 27 May 2024 (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.