Talk:Patagosphenos
Add topic| This article is rated Stub-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||||||
Automatic taxobox?
[edit]@PaleoNerd1905:, what is your objection to using an automatic taxobox for this article? It's going on 5 years since you left a note:
"DO NOT replace this taxobox with some automatic one, this is very fresh reclassification research and is all but settled (read the text); there are different views within the scientific community, wait till the discussion among the paleontologists is settled and then it can be replaced"
There is nothing to read in the text of this article about any different views in the scientific community. The sole reference in the article and subsequent papers treat this genus as a member of Eilenodontinae (e.g this one). There do seem to be different views as to whether Eilenodontinae is in Sphenodontidae or Opisthodontia (and I suppose Eilenodontinae might not even be monophyletic). The Eilenodontinae article mentions that, as it should. But that doesn't have any bearing on whether this article should have an automatic taxobox with Eilenodontinae as a parent. Plantdrew (talk) 21:30, 22 July 2026 (UTC)
- Stub-Class amphibian and reptile articles
- Low-importance amphibian and reptile articles
- Stub-Class amphibian and reptile articles of Low-importance
- WikiProject Amphibians and Reptiles articles
- Stub-Class Palaeontology articles
- Low-importance Palaeontology articles
- Stub-Class Palaeontology articles of Low-importance
- WikiProject Palaeontology articles