Talk:Adratiklit

Dinosaurs Low‑importance

	Dinosaurs portal 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
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Morocco Low‑importance

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Morocco, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Morocco 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.MoroccoWikipedia:WikiProject MoroccoTemplate:WikiProject MoroccoMorocco articles

Low

This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Help expand the project:

You can help! يمكنكم أن تساهموا

Here are some tasks awaiting attention:

Article requests : Mounir Charïbi
Assess : Rate the Unassessed Morocco articles and Unknown-importance Morocco-related articles.
Cleanup : Cleanup listing for this project is available. See also the list by category
Geographical coordinates : Add geographic coordinates to articles in Category:Morocco articles missing geocoordinate data
Photo : See requested photographs in Morocco
Stubs : Morocco stubs
Other :
- Translate from Arabic: Sellam Ameziane, Mrebih Rebbu

Classification

Why in "Scientific classification" written that Adratiklit included it the subffamily Dacentrurinae? In original article says that it's a basal stegosaur! Maksim Dolgun (talk) 16:03, 25 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

No it doesn't, figure twelve of the paper clearly shows it as a derived stegosaur, closer to Stegosaurus than kentrosaurus. It is clearly by any definition not a basal stegosaur. I have reverted your edits as they directly contradict the phylogeny in the paper. I apologise for swearing and being nasty in one of the revert descriptions but I got frustrated. I know that the paper doesn't use Stegosauridae as a classification, but clearly it is not a 'basal stegosaur' ala Gigantspinosaurus or Huayangosaurus. Hemiauchenia (talk) 23:35, 11 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I am of course sorry. And also, I think that we can add this new cladogram to article Stegosauridae and in articles about stegosaurids. Maksim Dolgun (talk) 02:52, 22 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Maksim Dolgun: Yes, I again apologise for being rude, cladograms are a pain to implement even in the simplest scenarios though. Hemiauchenia (talk) 20:28, 28 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]