Wikipedia:Featured and good topic candidates/Adelophthalmidae/addition1
Adelophthalmidae (1st supplementary nomination)[edit]
This topic is already featured. It is being re-nominated to add additional items. See Wikipedia talk:Featured topics/Adelophthalmidae for discussions of the topic's previous nominations. The additional items are:
8 articles
I've just found out there is a procedure for adding new articles to already existing good topics. Pruemopterus was promoted earlier this day, so I am nominating it for its addition. Super Dromaeosaurus (talk) 20:19, 28 January 2024 (UTC)
- Comment: I support the addition of this article to the group, but shouldn't Archopterus also be included? It was only created on January 31, so it's not been around for a long time, but I wanted to bring it up to make sure this topic ends up completed (or delisted eventually, hopefully not). Hey man im josh (talk) 21:09, 13 February 2024 (UTC)
- Anybody that wishes to can nominate this GT for delisting. I am completely burnout on this topic area and will not try to get Archopterus to GA status. I just wanted to follow the bureaucratic process and include Pruemopterus. Also a very slim hope that maybe someone could see this and decide to work on Archopterus to prevent a delisting which is unlikely. If this leads to the inevitable delisting of this GT to take place, so be it. Most of these were promoted back in 2018. Super Ψ Dro 21:36, 13 February 2024 (UTC)
- Should Unionopterus be added to this as well? It's already GA. User:Super Dromaeosaurus, it seems [1] would be the only authoritative source available on Archopterus? Since it's such a new discovery I'm not sure how that could possibly become GA from a single publication, but I'd think it should qualify for criterion 3c for just a peer review. I'd hate to see this delisted over that so I'd be happy to help if you have ideas though I've never edited in the fossil space! Reywas92Talk 22:32, 13 February 2024 (UTC)
- I had asked about Unionopterus on the original nomination of the whole GT [2]. One user said we probably should wait for new studies to bring certainty to know if the genus is a certain member of Adelophthalmidae. Such a study could take decades or more to come. I am in favor of including it though, as the genus is mostly discussed in the context of its relationship with Adelophthalmidae and its morphology would indicate it was indeed a member of it. I'd like the opinion of more users on this topic.
- Yes, Archopterus could perfectly become a GA even though there's only one main source to draw information from. Pruemopterus is one such case, discovered recently in 2020. The reviewer also had this doubt and asked about it and it was fine [3]. Appreciate the help offer, it encourages me. A possibility could be to start a joint draft and write the article from stratch. I could coordinate it and give you some indications so that you can help despite being unexperienced. All eurypterid articles (so that you understand, if dogs and wolfs are canine mammals, Pruemopterus, Archopterus etc are eurypterid arthropods) follow a four-section model and I can tell Archopterus's article would end up similar to Pruemopterus's meaning it can be used as a model (as you can see, the article and all its sections are short). It is actually easier than it looks like. I wouldn't be willing to participate on this draft despite your generous offer if it is only the two of us because of reasons I realized were sounding very lazy and selfish as I tried to elaborate on them. I am willing though to do this is we are four, perhaps three. Super Ψ Dro 23:18, 13 February 2024 (UTC)
- Delist – I think so long as Archopterus is a Wikipedia article, then it should be included because it is a member of the Adelophthalmidae family. Whether that is through a peer review per criterion 3c or as a GA/FA. As the nominator mentioned, even though there are very few sources it still can reach GA status like Pruemopterus has. But I think until someone can bring Archopterus to GA status or complete a peer review, then I have no choice but to oppose the nomination, which is a huge shame. Please ping me if someone has opted to have the article reviewed and I will happily change my vote. Idiosincrático (talk) 06:51, 10 March 2024 (UTC)
- Archopterus needs to be a GA or PR if it is to remain as an article. Pruemopterus should be added to the topic. But there needs to a solution to Archopterus otherwise the topic should be removed (Biology is my typical subject matter so let me know if I got something wrong). Spy-cicle💥 Talk? 15:29, 22 March 2024 (UTC)
- Delist unfortunately per above. QueenofHearts 22:57, 30 March 2024 (UTC)
- Delist, with respect to all those who have contributed to these articles, as Archopterus is not a good article. If the topic is notable then its inclusion and GA status is necessary under the good topic rules. I notice that Unionopterus and Wiedopterus are GAs so any changes to their classification would not be a barrier to this topic being re-promoted. — Bilorv (talk) 18:19, 14 April 2024 (UTC)
- Yeah no worries. I am the author of most of these and I clarify that I am not mad or anything to people here. I started this nomination to continue the normal bureaucratic process knowing well this could be the outcome. I am really done with this topic area and in fact this is going to be my very last involvement into it after many years. Which means a delist was going to happen eventually.
- By the way, I talked with the author of Wiedopterus and sought a third opinion, and it was decided academia was not clear on whether the genus should be included in this family, so it wouldn't be part of this GT. Super Ψ Dro 20:05, 14 April 2024 (UTC)
- Delist for now, but I would be more than happy to help bring Archopterus to the quality needed. Chaotıċ Enby (talk · contribs) 15:58, 16 April 2024 (UTC)