Rubidgina is within the scope of WikiProject Animals, an attempt to better organize information in articles related to
animals and
zoology. For more information, visit the
project page.AnimalsWikipedia:WikiProject AnimalsTemplate:WikiProject Animalsanimal 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
An editor has requested that an image or photograph be
added to this article.
Requested move 24 May 2020
The following is a closed discussion of a
requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a
move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.
Oppose Fossilworks is not the only available source on the matter. "Rubidgea" and "Rubidgina" are seperate genera, with Rubidgea representing the species R. atrox and others (Interestingly, Rubidgea was also initially designated as a suborder, a concept has since been dropped) and Rudigina representing R. angusticeps. Rubidginia is a suborder as designated by Boettger (1952) and was never identified as a genus by Fossilworks. There are a number of papers, but here's a free one that I think sums up some of the matter well
[1]Macrophyseter |
talk19:41, 24 May 2020 (UTC)reply
According to
Fossilworks, Rubidgina is a nomen dubium and separate genus than Rubidgea, it also states a Rubidginia, which is a suborder, so let's not confuse Rubidgina with Rubidginia, nor Rubidgea, I'd keep this page and also change the taxobox name, which is Rubidgea instead of Rubidgina. As for the suborder Rubidginia, I'd suggest creating a separate article.
JurassicClassic767 (
talk)
11:07, 25 May 2020 (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.
Rubidgina is within the scope of WikiProject Animals, an attempt to better organize information in articles related to
animals and
zoology. For more information, visit the
project page.AnimalsWikipedia:WikiProject AnimalsTemplate:WikiProject Animalsanimal 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
An editor has requested that an image or photograph be
added to this article.
Requested move 24 May 2020
The following is a closed discussion of a
requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a
move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.
Oppose Fossilworks is not the only available source on the matter. "Rubidgea" and "Rubidgina" are seperate genera, with Rubidgea representing the species R. atrox and others (Interestingly, Rubidgea was also initially designated as a suborder, a concept has since been dropped) and Rudigina representing R. angusticeps. Rubidginia is a suborder as designated by Boettger (1952) and was never identified as a genus by Fossilworks. There are a number of papers, but here's a free one that I think sums up some of the matter well
[1]Macrophyseter |
talk19:41, 24 May 2020 (UTC)reply
According to
Fossilworks, Rubidgina is a nomen dubium and separate genus than Rubidgea, it also states a Rubidginia, which is a suborder, so let's not confuse Rubidgina with Rubidginia, nor Rubidgea, I'd keep this page and also change the taxobox name, which is Rubidgea instead of Rubidgina. As for the suborder Rubidginia, I'd suggest creating a separate article.
JurassicClassic767 (
talk)
11:07, 25 May 2020 (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.