Talk:Nesorhinus

Mammals Low‑importance

	Mammals portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Mammals, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of mammal-related subjects 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.MammalsWikipedia:WikiProject MammalsTemplate:WikiProject Mammalsmammal 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.

Merge proposal[edit]

Support the proposal to merge Nesorhinus philippinensis to here, on the grounds of context. Klbrain (talk) 08:45, 21 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Klbrain: Done. Hemiauchenia (talk) 00:31, 3 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Merge proposal (again)[edit]

Merge passed. Hemiauchenia (talk) 21:14, 15 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

WP:PALEO guidelines suggest that all species of an extinct genus should be covered under a single article unless under exceptional circumstances (like the woolly mammoth). I'm not seeing how Nesorhinus hayasakai passes this relatively high bar. While the article is longer than this article is currently, much of the pose could be cut down substantially without losing its meaning, and some of it is redundant to prose already in the article. Hemiauchenia (talk) 17:56, 28 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Support per nom, there is no good reason to keep this separate from the genus article. SilverTiger12 (talk) 18:54, 29 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Support AFH (talk) 17:30, 29 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.