This article is within the scope of WikiProject Dinosaurs, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
dinosaurs and
dinosaur-related topics 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.DinosaursWikipedia:WikiProject DinosaursTemplate:WikiProject Dinosaursdinosaurs articles
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
Why is it growing so much with rather unrelated information? This is an article about this animal, not about
Laramidia. Most of that info should be moved there.
FunkMonk (
talk) 19:32, 18 October 2016 (UTC)reply
RfC about adding conservation status to all animals
The line is drawn by whether they're featured on the
IUCN redlist or other such system. We as editors don't draw the line.
FunkMonk (
talk) 00:22, 4 March 2021 (UTC)reply
I've been repeatedly trying to tell you that giving conservation status to species not already given official conservation status by official conservation organizations like the IUCN is
WP:ORIGINAL RESEARCH, but you appear to have a bad habit of becoming selectively illiterate of whatever advice you do not want to accept.--
Mr Fink (
talk) 00:33, 4 March 2021 (UTC)reply
Maybe, instead of being so pompous and arrogantly gung-ho, if you could be assed, instead, to notice that of the hundreds to thousands-years extinct animals officially given conservation status by official conservation organizations, they all range in age from the Late Pleistocene to Early Holocene, you wouldn't need to make such pitiful attempts at snideness to cover your selective illiteracy.--
Mr Fink (
talk) 00:48, 4 March 2021 (UTC)reply
I opened this RfC to get a consistent position across all pages but you seem to be only interested in starting a fight. Get help.
2601:646:4002:D540:B8A3:9D2D:A89F:F219 (
talk) 00:53, 4 March 2021 (UTC)reply
The Haast Eagle is not on the Redlist or other lists as it has been extinct for several hundred year. Should we be removing the status for those pages?
2601:646:4002:D540:B8A3:9D2D:A89F:F219 (
talk) 00:46, 4 March 2021 (UTC)reply
Yes, they should not have conservation status if they're not officially recognized by any official conservation organizations.--
Mr Fink (
talk) 00:49, 4 March 2021 (UTC)reply
Is this RfC specifically about Augustynolophus, or is it broader in scope? --
Redrose64 🌹 (
talk) 13:47, 4 March 2021 (UTC)reply
If it's something you want changed in general, I'd suggest the tree of life or palaeontology projects. But I think it'll be dead on revival. It seems like you just think there shouldn't be inconsistency, which everyone already agrees with.
FunkMonk (
talk) 22:08, 4 March 2021 (UTC)reply
The thing is, if the RfC is just about Augustynolophus, the wording all animals is wrong. If it's broader in scope, it's at the wrong venue. Either way, it needs fixing. --
Redrose64 🌹 (
talk) 23:36, 4 March 2021 (UTC)reply
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Dinosaurs, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
dinosaurs and
dinosaur-related topics 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.DinosaursWikipedia:WikiProject DinosaursTemplate:WikiProject Dinosaursdinosaurs articles
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
Why is it growing so much with rather unrelated information? This is an article about this animal, not about
Laramidia. Most of that info should be moved there.
FunkMonk (
talk) 19:32, 18 October 2016 (UTC)reply
RfC about adding conservation status to all animals
The line is drawn by whether they're featured on the
IUCN redlist or other such system. We as editors don't draw the line.
FunkMonk (
talk) 00:22, 4 March 2021 (UTC)reply
I've been repeatedly trying to tell you that giving conservation status to species not already given official conservation status by official conservation organizations like the IUCN is
WP:ORIGINAL RESEARCH, but you appear to have a bad habit of becoming selectively illiterate of whatever advice you do not want to accept.--
Mr Fink (
talk) 00:33, 4 March 2021 (UTC)reply
Maybe, instead of being so pompous and arrogantly gung-ho, if you could be assed, instead, to notice that of the hundreds to thousands-years extinct animals officially given conservation status by official conservation organizations, they all range in age from the Late Pleistocene to Early Holocene, you wouldn't need to make such pitiful attempts at snideness to cover your selective illiteracy.--
Mr Fink (
talk) 00:48, 4 March 2021 (UTC)reply
I opened this RfC to get a consistent position across all pages but you seem to be only interested in starting a fight. Get help.
2601:646:4002:D540:B8A3:9D2D:A89F:F219 (
talk) 00:53, 4 March 2021 (UTC)reply
The Haast Eagle is not on the Redlist or other lists as it has been extinct for several hundred year. Should we be removing the status for those pages?
2601:646:4002:D540:B8A3:9D2D:A89F:F219 (
talk) 00:46, 4 March 2021 (UTC)reply
Yes, they should not have conservation status if they're not officially recognized by any official conservation organizations.--
Mr Fink (
talk) 00:49, 4 March 2021 (UTC)reply
Is this RfC specifically about Augustynolophus, or is it broader in scope? --
Redrose64 🌹 (
talk) 13:47, 4 March 2021 (UTC)reply
If it's something you want changed in general, I'd suggest the tree of life or palaeontology projects. But I think it'll be dead on revival. It seems like you just think there shouldn't be inconsistency, which everyone already agrees with.
FunkMonk (
talk) 22:08, 4 March 2021 (UTC)reply
The thing is, if the RfC is just about Augustynolophus, the wording all animals is wrong. If it's broader in scope, it's at the wrong venue. Either way, it needs fixing. --
Redrose64 🌹 (
talk) 23:36, 4 March 2021 (UTC)reply