Talk:Diplodocimorpha
Latest comment: 1 year ago by Ornithopsis in topic Proposal of merge with Diplodocoidea
 | This article was nominated for merging with Diplodocoidea on 2022-08-26. The result of the discussion (permanent link) was to merge. |
 | This redirect does not require a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||
Proposal of merge with Diplodocoidea 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 unanimous agreement to merge. Ornithopsis (talk) 15:24, 27 August 2022 (UTC)
Diplodocoidea and Diplodocimorpha have nearly identical content, usually differing only in the inclusion of Haplocanthosaurus and sometimes not even that. There is pretty much no value in having separate pages for the two clades, and keeping them separate would be somewhat redundant and waste editors' time with two pages to maintain rather than one. Diplodocoidea is both the more inclusive clade and gets eight times as many hits on Google Scholar, so Diplodocimorpha should be merged into Diplodocoidea. Ornithopsis (talk) 14:20, 19 August 2022 (UTC)
- I think I support this, provided its not just redirected, and the content is migrated over. The main superfamily article needs some work. IJReid {{T - C - D - R}} 15:22, 19 August 2022 (UTC)
- Support, no need for two pages for a near-identical clade. LittleLazyLass (Talk | Contributions) 16:03, 19 August 2022 (UTC)
- Support, with the same caveat as IJ. Lythronaxargestes (talk | contribs) 05:21, 22 August 2022 (UTC)
- Support Per nom. Hemiauchenia (talk) 09:54, 23 August 2022 (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.