Talk:Joan Wiffen's theropod
Latest comment: 4 years ago by IJReid in topic Merge discussion
 | This redirect does not require a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||
Just clearing this up... edit
The NZ theropod cannot be an allosaur. Australovenator was a neovenatorid, not an allosaurid. The NZ theropod is likely an abelisaur.
Also, why does this theropod need an article? We don't have articles for any other unnamed dinosaurs. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 101.98.128.11 (talk) 04:03, 2 June 2012 (UTC)
- Query logged on article authors (User:Tyrantlizard) talk page. NealeFamily (talk) 23:00, 24 July 2013 (UTC)
Merge discussion edit
- I support the merge raised by FunkMonk. This article amounts to little more than one paragraph of useful information and another of tangentially relevant fluff text. It should absolutely be merged following project conventions. 2001:569:7CF0:9300:A47E:5CD:254B:F95 (talk) 04:38, 20 August 2019 (UTC)
- Only question is whether this fossil has ever been referred to as "Joan Wiffen's theropod" in the literature, or if that name was just invented for this article's title... FunkMonk (talk) 07:26, 20 August 2019 (UTC)
- The discussion kinda died, but I popped here from the project main page and redirected it to the formation article, where I put the only relevant information. Never informally named, would be pointless at Theropoda, so it seemed the only reasonable place. IJReid {{T - C - D - R}} 05:51, 21 January 2020 (UTC)
- Only question is whether this fossil has ever been referred to as "Joan Wiffen's theropod" in the literature, or if that name was just invented for this article's title... FunkMonk (talk) 07:26, 20 August 2019 (UTC)