External links modified edit

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Hagerman horse. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 21:41, 22 January 2016 (UTC)Reply

External links modified edit

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 2 external links on Hagerman horse. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 13:43, 23 February 2016 (UTC)Reply

External links modified edit

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Hagerman horse. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 09:03, 13 January 2017 (UTC)Reply

Proposing merge from synonym Equus occidentalis to accepted name Equus (Dolichohippus) simplicidens (Hagerman horse) 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 No consensus. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 12:45, 10 August 2019 (UTC)Reply

Neither are particularly reliable sources themselves, and are often outdated. What does actual recent research say? Looking at Google Scholar, it seems the name Equus occidentalis is still frequently used. FunkMonk (talk) 17:43, 17 January 2019 (UTC)Reply
Oppose. North American equid taxonomy is notoriously convoluted and there is no consensus in the literature about the correct taxonomy. The species proposed for Pleistocene North American horses range from two to dozens. 206.12.37.67 (talk) 21:40, 17 January 2019 (UTC)Reply
Oppose. Scott (pers. comm., cited in Morgan and Lucas 2005) considers the Equus occidentalis lectotype premolar undiagnostic, making occidentalis a nomen dubium. Morgan and Harris (2015) likewise treat E. occidentalis and E. simplicidens as separate. It's also quixotic that the Paleobiology Database doesn't take into account the synonymy of Equus laurentius with the modern horse by Scott et al. (2010). Therefore, E. simplicidens and E. occidentalis ought to be kept as separate articles.
      • G. S Morgan and S. G Lucas, 2005. Pleistocene vertebrate faunas in New Mexico from alluvial, fluvial, and lacustrine deposits. New Mexico Museum of Natural History and Science Bulletin 28:185–248.
      • Morgan, G.S. and Harris, A.H., 2015. Pliocene and Pleistocene vertebrates of New Mexico. New Mexico Museum of Natural History and Science Bulletin 68, p. 233–427.
      • Eric Scott, Thomas W. Stafford Jr, Russell W. Graham and Larry D. Martin "Morphology and Metrics, Isotopes and Dates: Determining the Validity of Equus laurentius Hay, 1913," Journal of Vertebrate Paleontology 30(6), (1 November 2010). https://doi.org/10.1080/02724634.2010.52078068.4.252.105 (talk) 02:33, 18 January 2019 (UTC)Vahe DemirjianReply
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.