Talk:Pig-nosed turtle

This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Turtles High‑importance

Pig-nosed turtle is part of WikiProject Turtles, an attempt at creating a standardized, informative, comprehensive and easy-to-use turtle resource. If you would like to participate, you can choose to edit this article, or visit the project page for more information.TurtlesWikipedia:WikiProject TurtlesTemplate:WikiProject Turtlesturtle articles

High This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Interested in helping WikiProject Turtles? See the project discussion or the to-do below:

Get involved with WikiProject Turtles discussion.

Here are some tasks awaiting attention:

Copyedit : Green sea turtle!
Expand : Emydidae, Tortoise, Spotted turtle, Glyptemys
Photo : Find a photo of turtle articles needing a photo
Stubs : Expand a stub article.
Update : Emydidae, Tortoise
Other : * Out of date turtle articles abound, mainly taxonomy issues, get a list here and scroll down for articles. Taxonomy information is available in WikiProject Turtles resources.
- {{Extinct turtles}} and fossil forms of both living and extinct turtles requires attention:many extinct articles require either expansion or creation and sources seems hard to come by. A list of fossil forms is being compiled so progress can be charted.
- Patrol: recent changes to turtle articles and check for improvements or errors.

Australia: Northern Territory / Biota Start‑class Low‑importance

	Australia portal Pig-nosed turtle is within the scope of WikiProject Australia, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of Australia and Australia-related topics. If you would like to participate, visit the project page.AustraliaWikipedia:WikiProject AustraliaTemplate:WikiProject AustraliaAustralia articles
Start	This article has been given a rating which conflicts with the project-independent quality rating in the banner shell. Please resolve this conflict if possible.
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Northern Territory (assessed as Low-importance).
	This article is supported by WikiProject Australian biota (assessed as Low-importance).
	Need help improving this article? Ask a Librarian^{What's this?} at the National Library of Australia, or the Northern Territory Library.
	The Wikimedia Australia chapter can be contacted via email to helpwikimedia.org.au for non-editorial assistance.

Indonesia Low‑importance

	Indonesia portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Indonesia, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Indonesia and Indonesia-related topics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.IndonesiaWikipedia:WikiProject IndonesiaTemplate:WikiProject IndonesiaIndonesia articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Chelodina insculpta edit

Latest comment: 11 years ago3 comments2 people in discussion

Was wondering why Chelodina insculpta was added as a synonym here. That is a fossil species described by de Vis (1893). It is a valid species and correctly assigned to the Chelodina. Cheers, Faendalimas ^talk 16:33, 30 May 2012 (UTC)Reply

The full line in Fritz 2007 reads "1997 Chelodina insculpta– Cann (non †Chelodina insculptade Vis, 1897), Monitor (J. Vict. Herpetol. Soc.), 9 (1): 34." Regards, SunCreator ^(talk) 18:51, 30 May 2012 (UTC)Reply

Hmmm... this makes no sense, I dont remember this and do not have Cann 97 on me to check. But if he named a species Chelodina insculpta then it is a junior homonym of Chelodina insculpta de Vis, 1897. Unless someone has moved it to Carettochelys, whereby it would be a junior homonym of that species. I would imagine this is an error of some kind. Cheers, Faendalimas ^talk 20:46, 30 May 2012 (UTC)Reply

Basal? edit

Latest comment: 7 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

This species interests me. Is it the most basal (ie primitive) of the extant reptilia? Wikipedia gives me that impression, but doesn't come out and say so.24.108.58.49 (talk) 18:49, 1 January 2017 (UTC)Reply

Add topic