 | This  level-5 vital article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||
| |||||||||||
Merge request edit
- Set up merge request. Reasons: only add info in Ichthyornis dispar is synonymy. In line with the KISS principle, Ichthyornis should be the page to merge to (shorter name, 2.5 times as many pages linking to it). Dysmorodrepanis 19:13, 8 October 2006 (UTC)
Revision of Ichthyornis edit
Clarke (2004) assigned Graculavus lentus to a new genus, which she named Austinornis, and Ichthyornis tener to a new genus, Guidavis. Remove these species from this page.
Are Ichthornis anceps, I. victor, I. agilis, I. validus, and Angeliornis antecessor probably disitnct from I. dispar?
Size? edit
How big was this animal? The article gives no indication whatsoever.
- It was about the size of a gull (~ 2 ft or 60 cm long). ArthurWeasley 04:10, 19 May 2007 (UTC)
Ichthyornithiformes edit
According to wikispecies[1], Ichthyornithiformes contained 2 families, 4 genera, and 6 species. Who's wrong? /Natox (talk) 18:52, 10 April 2008 (UTC)
- Wikispecies sections of fossil birds is an absolute mess of decades out of date information, unfortunately. Dinoguy2 (talk) 18:50, 23 April 2016 (UTC)
- Ok, so shall we merge or not - the higher order taxon seems to have other fragments of undescribed taxa...? Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 11:17, 4 June 2017 (UTC)
- I think we should merge and add the info on the fragments of undescribed taxa in the classification section seeing as this has been done before. I also plan to sort out the Wikispecies articles as well (as I have done with theropoda).Lavalizard101 (talk) 18:34, 9 June 2017 (UTC)
- @Dinoguy2: given that you created the current Ichthyornithes article back in 2016, it might be helpful to have your expert view on this proposal. As a non-expert on the topic, the proposal looks like a good one in order to consolidate the existing information on the topic, and there don't seems to be any objections so far. Note that Lavalizard101 isn't available to do this. Klbrain (talk) 12:48, 21 July 2018 (UTC)
- Ichthyornithes contains more taxa than just Ichthyornis. Lavalizard mentioned undescribed taxa, but they're not undescribed, just unnamed, i.e. too fragmentary to formally name but definitely not I. dispar (and I think at least one recent study did find another named taxon in a clade with Ichthyornis, though I have to check on which one). I think we should keep Ichthyornis Ichthyornithes as separate pages and merge Ichthyornithiformes and Ichthyornithidae into Ichthyornithes, which Clark 2004 argued is the priority name for the clade. Dinoguy2 (talk) 20:12, 30 July 2018 (UTC)
- @Dinoguy2: given that you created the current Ichthyornithes article back in 2016, it might be helpful to have your expert view on this proposal. As a non-expert on the topic, the proposal looks like a good one in order to consolidate the existing information on the topic, and there don't seems to be any objections so far. Note that Lavalizard101 isn't available to do this. Klbrain (talk) 12:48, 21 July 2018 (UTC)
- I think we should merge and add the info on the fragments of undescribed taxa in the classification section seeing as this has been done before. I also plan to sort out the Wikispecies articles as well (as I have done with theropoda).Lavalizard101 (talk) 18:34, 9 June 2017 (UTC)
- Ok, so shall we merge or not - the higher order taxon seems to have other fragments of undescribed taxa...? Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 11:17, 4 June 2017 (UTC)