This article was reviewed by member(s) of WikiProject Articles for creation. The project works to allow users to contribute quality articles and media files to the encyclopedia and track their progress as they are developed. To participate, please visit the project page for more information.Articles for creationWikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creationTemplate:WikiProject Articles for creationAfC articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Arthropods, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of arthropods 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.ArthropodsWikipedia:WikiProject ArthropodsTemplate:WikiProject ArthropodsArthropods articles
Re these edits: [1], [2]. I am not a subject matter expert so I can't comment on the validity of this new row, but a quick Google search suggests it's plausible. If the row is kept, we should update the "The following 13 species" to 14, and add it to the taxobox. Mitch Ames (talk) 12:18, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Mitch Ames: It looks legitimate on a surface-level, but under the surface, you'll find that it's a nomen nudum which is at best a synonym for Neolithodes indicus as discussed in the 2020 paper which describes N. indicus for the first time. And even then, I'm not sure it'd even be worth a redirect to that given it's only ever mentioned casually in two papers from the 1980s by Dawson. (Sorry it took so long to get to this; I didn't know it was here.) TheTechnician27(Talk page)01:14, 11 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
