Talk:Pseudopulex

Insects Low‑importance

	Insects portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Insects, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of insects 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.InsectsWikipedia:WikiProject InsectsTemplate:WikiProject InsectsInsects articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Palaeontology Low‑importance

	Paleontology portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Palaeontology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of palaeontology-related topics and create a standardized, informative, comprehensive and easy-to-use resource 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.PalaeontologyWikipedia:WikiProject PalaeontologyTemplate:WikiProject PalaeontologyPalaeontology articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Untitled edit

Latest comment: 11 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Is the recent change correct? [1] Are there only two members of this genus? Is every member of this genus a giant flea? I see no reason to abbreviate the names of the two species. Dream Focus 22:42, 15 June 2012 (UTC)Reply

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment edit

Latest comment: 2 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 14 January 2020 and 8 May 2020. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Vamurph. Peer reviewers: Bmassey98.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 02:48, 18 January 2022 (UTC)Reply

Editing Pseudopulex edit

Latest comment: 4 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

Hi all! I just wanted to let everyone know I made some additions to this wikipedia page. I did a lot of research (and included my references as well) to add a 'Morphology' Section, 'Current Relevance' Section, and add to the 'Discovery and Phylogeny' Section. I will link my sandbox for reference or if you want to chat with me on my talk page. Let me know if you have any questions or concerns about my edits and I will look into it. Thank you for being patient and understanding! I really enjoyed working on this page. Vamurph (talk) 20:42, 13 April 2020 (UTC)Reply

Nice this is getting some attention. And that you discovered the papers had free CC licenses. On this note, you don't need to mention licenses in image captions, the info on the file page is sufficient. And it is probably more neutral to use pictures of the actual fossils as the main taxobox image than the hypothetical restoration. FunkMonk (talk) 00:32, 14 April 2020 (UTC)Reply

Add topic