Talk:Orthacanthus
| This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Orthacanthus article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
| Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
 | This article is rated Stub-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Self-Contradictory edit
This article contradicts itself. It says the genus originated in the Carboniferous, and also says the genus originated in the Devonian. Please fix this error. 2601:441:467F:9E00:874:2C02:3499:5BB (talk) 02:33, 25 February 2020 (UTC)
The introduction is also claiming it was a freshwater-shark, but that it was marine. So which one is it? --Ornitholestes (talk) 13:30, 17 February 2021 (UTC)
Fossil Range edit
What sources, other than the internet garbage scow that is Fossilworks, are there that state that Orthacanthus ranges from the Emsian to the Triassic? I removed the source Aselee provided because, upon reading it, I noticed that the paper said nothing about the fossil range of Orthacanthus, nor even mentioned the words "Emsian" or "Triassic." That, and the source about "Diplodus problematicus" is unclear about whether or not it's in or outside of Orthacanthus--Mr Fink (talk) 23:10, 5 March 2020 (UTC)
@Apokryltaros: Friendly reminder to stay respectful and objective. Please clarify the reference used for the fossil range of Orthacanthus. Regarding Diplodus problematicus, the source linked explains that Orthacanthus and Diplodus are synonymous under the tab "Taxonomic History." I have not made any changes to the page so that can come to a mutual agreement instead of trying to start an edit-war. Thanks. Aselee (talk) 00:30, 8 March 2020 (UTC)
- The thing is, the source given for Diplodus and Orthacanthus being synonymous, PaleoDatabase, also confusingly states that Diplodus is a synonym of Doliodus, and neither Google, nor Scholar.Google bring up "Orthacanthus problematicus," or any other Emsian species of Orthacanthus, in any literature. "Hampe, O. "On the Dentition of Orthacanthus (Chondrichthyes, Xencanthida) Upper Carboniferous-Lower Permian." Palaont Z 62.3-4 (1988)" on the other hand, states the genus is restricted from the Upper Carboniferous to the Lower Permian, and all of the literature on Scholar.Google I've found always refer to Orthacanthus as being either Carboniferous or Permian, never Devonian, nor Triassic.--Mr Fink (talk) 01:08, 8 March 2020 (UTC)