Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Extinction/Archive 3
 | This is an archive of past discussions about Wikipedia:WikiProject Extinction. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
| Archive 1 | Archive 2 | Archive 3 | Archive 4 | Archive 5 | Archive 6 |
This page is an Archive of the discussions from WikiProject Extinction talk page (Discussion page).
 |
|---|
The place to make a proposal, suggestion or to discuss a certain topic!
WikiProject Palaeontology
Hi everyone,
A new WikiProject, Palaeontology has been set up, and aims to be the umbrella project uniting Dinos, pterosaurs and monsters from the deep, alongside all the other palaeo article out there that aren't under a strict wikiproject. It was only set up today, so support, opinions and/or criticism is needed. I have come around to this idea, as there are a large number of articles out there in dire need of work, and this would be an excellent way to bring in some collaborative editing. Cheers guys and dolls, Mark t young (talk) 15:53, 30 June 2008 (UTC)
Merge
Hi! I am the beginning author of the The Big Five extinction article. For a long time, I was thinking of merging the article into the other articles about the seperate extinctions. How can I merge my article?--Dale S. Satre 17:21, 24 August 2008 (UTC)
IUCN Red List 2008
As you are certainly knowing there is a new redlist since Monday. Well, i must say it is better to do a proper research with other reliable sources (in particular up to date peer reviewed books or papers) than to use the assessment data of the current list one to one. First of all many of the new data have no reliable citations or source data, the other thing it there are many spelling errors, e.g. Falco duboisi (which is the correct spelling) turns to Falco buboisi (which is incorrect). Or the Pfärrig (correct spelling) turns to Pfärrit (which is incorrect). Another important thing, most of the search code ids have changed, so most extermal links have to been checked whether they are still accessable. --Melly42 (talk) 15:20, 10 October 2008 (UTC)