This redirect is within the scope of WikiProject Germany, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
Germany 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.GermanyWikipedia:WikiProject GermanyTemplate:WikiProject GermanyGermany articles
This redirect is within the scope of WikiProject Bavaria, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
Bavaria 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.BavariaWikipedia:WikiProject BavariaTemplate:WikiProject BavariaBavaria articles
Maxberg specimen is part of WikiProject Birds, an attempt at creating a standardized, informative and easy-to-use ornithological resource. If you would like to participate, visit the
project page, where you can join the
discussion and see a list of open tasks. Please do not
substitute this template.BirdsWikipedia:WikiProject BirdsTemplate:WikiProject Birdsbird articles
This redirect 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 redirect 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
A fact from Maxberg specimen appeared on Wikipedia's
Main Page in the Did you know column on 2 March 2011 (
check views). The text of the entry was as follows:
Did you know... that the Maxberg specimen, one of only 10 Archaeopteryx specimens ever found, has been lost since 1991?
Instead of having one article, wouldnt it be nicer to have a more focused "specimens of Archaeopteryx" article? Similar to the
specimens of Tyrannosaurus one. Then the huge section about specimens in the main Archaeopteryx article could be split off.
FunkMonk (
talk)
11:18, 1 March 2011 (UTC)reply
I agree, at its current size, Archaeopteryx is well due for a split. Two options are available, from my view: Have one article for all ten, with the current Maxberg specimen one as a chapter or have ten individual ones. Given that there is only ten with their history is so distinctivley different and each quite significant, individual ones seem justified. But I certainly wouldn't vote against a
Specimens of Archaeopteryx either.
Calistemon (
talk)
11:55, 1 March 2011 (UTC)reply
How long do you intend to make this specific article? Because if each specimen had this amount of text, I think they would fit neatly in an article together.
FunkMonk (
talk)
18:03, 1 March 2011 (UTC)reply
Its now pretty much at the lenght I can make it, given the limited sources I have. I would like more specific information on the fossil itself, but haven't found much more on it.
Calistemon (
talk)
23:38, 1 March 2011 (UTC)reply
Well, I wouldn't say the specimen section in
Archaeopteryx is all that huge, given the historical relevance and notability of the specimens. And I certainly hope a
Specimens of Archaeopteryx won't resemble
Specimens of Tyrannosaurus which doesn't mention most of the specimens it supposedly is about but is apparently used as a waste-basket for information banished from
Tyrannosaurus — and very effectively so: the main article has about 1.2 million hits per year, the junk article about 12,000. What is removed from a main article might as well never have been written at all: practically no-one will ever read it again.
For more information about the specimens, I strongly recommend Wellnhofer's recent Archaeopteryx — the icon of evolution. I'll expand this article just to show how much can be gleaned from that work :o).--
MWAK (
talk)
05:15, 24 April 2011 (UTC)reply
This redirect is within the scope of WikiProject Germany, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
Germany 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.GermanyWikipedia:WikiProject GermanyTemplate:WikiProject GermanyGermany articles
This redirect is within the scope of WikiProject Bavaria, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
Bavaria 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.BavariaWikipedia:WikiProject BavariaTemplate:WikiProject BavariaBavaria articles
Maxberg specimen is part of WikiProject Birds, an attempt at creating a standardized, informative and easy-to-use ornithological resource. If you would like to participate, visit the
project page, where you can join the
discussion and see a list of open tasks. Please do not
substitute this template.BirdsWikipedia:WikiProject BirdsTemplate:WikiProject Birdsbird articles
This redirect 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 redirect 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
A fact from Maxberg specimen appeared on Wikipedia's
Main Page in the Did you know column on 2 March 2011 (
check views). The text of the entry was as follows:
Did you know... that the Maxberg specimen, one of only 10 Archaeopteryx specimens ever found, has been lost since 1991?
Instead of having one article, wouldnt it be nicer to have a more focused "specimens of Archaeopteryx" article? Similar to the
specimens of Tyrannosaurus one. Then the huge section about specimens in the main Archaeopteryx article could be split off.
FunkMonk (
talk)
11:18, 1 March 2011 (UTC)reply
I agree, at its current size, Archaeopteryx is well due for a split. Two options are available, from my view: Have one article for all ten, with the current Maxberg specimen one as a chapter or have ten individual ones. Given that there is only ten with their history is so distinctivley different and each quite significant, individual ones seem justified. But I certainly wouldn't vote against a
Specimens of Archaeopteryx either.
Calistemon (
talk)
11:55, 1 March 2011 (UTC)reply
How long do you intend to make this specific article? Because if each specimen had this amount of text, I think they would fit neatly in an article together.
FunkMonk (
talk)
18:03, 1 March 2011 (UTC)reply
Its now pretty much at the lenght I can make it, given the limited sources I have. I would like more specific information on the fossil itself, but haven't found much more on it.
Calistemon (
talk)
23:38, 1 March 2011 (UTC)reply
Well, I wouldn't say the specimen section in
Archaeopteryx is all that huge, given the historical relevance and notability of the specimens. And I certainly hope a
Specimens of Archaeopteryx won't resemble
Specimens of Tyrannosaurus which doesn't mention most of the specimens it supposedly is about but is apparently used as a waste-basket for information banished from
Tyrannosaurus — and very effectively so: the main article has about 1.2 million hits per year, the junk article about 12,000. What is removed from a main article might as well never have been written at all: practically no-one will ever read it again.
For more information about the specimens, I strongly recommend Wellnhofer's recent Archaeopteryx — the icon of evolution. I'll expand this article just to show how much can be gleaned from that work :o).--
MWAK (
talk)
05:15, 24 April 2011 (UTC)reply
.svg){kind=small}
