Talk:Halicephalobus mephisto

A news item involving Halicephalobus mephisto was featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the In the news section on 3 June 2011.

Wikipedia

Animals Mid‑importance

Halicephalobus mephisto 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

Mid

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

It is requested that an image or images be included in this article to improve its quality.

WikiProject Animals To-do:

Here are some Open Tasks :

Copyedit:
Merge: GLAM/ARKive donated texts into articles about endangered species.
Improve: Photoperiodism, Tool use by non-human animals, Omnivore, Animal suicide, Sphaerium beckmani (a species in family Sphaeriidae),
Requests:
- Mammals:
- Invertebrates: Campocraspedon
- Fishes: Zaniolepis frenata
Merge: GLAM/ARKive donated texts into articles about endangered species.
Expand: Junqueira cow, Atka mackerel
Nominate and vote: Science collaboration of the month, Article Improvement Drive, WikiProject Animals Collaboration

South Africa Low‑importance

	South Africa portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject South Africa, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of South Africa 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.South AfricaWikipedia:WikiProject South AfricaTemplate:WikiProject South AfricaSouth Africa articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Depth: 0.8-3.6 km

The sources doesn't claim 1.3 km which is happenstance less than 2000 m, they claim something like 0.8 to 3.6 km. Fixup needed. Rursus dixit. (^mbork³!) 11:30, 3 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I'm also confused over the 1.3km/2000m part. It implies that there have been other discoveries in the remaining 700m (IE more than the 1.3km). Lugnuts (talk) 14:26, 3 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Contradiction ?

The article states this to be the "deepest-living animal" ever found
and then states a previously-known species was *also* found there...
86.25.121.161 (talk) 06:19, 4 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Same study, different place. Other species were found in shallower mines, though still very deep. J Milburn (talk) 08:13, 4 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Sentence doesn't make sense.

"It was detected in ore recovered from deep rock fracture water in several gold mines ". This sentence doesn't make sense. Was it in the ore or the fracture water ?Eregli bob (talk) 01:13, 5 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

Halicephalobus mephisto head.jpg

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 13:08, 27 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Plectus aquatilis?

The article refers to "a previously known species found at similar depths in the same study was Plectus aquatilis." There is no article in Wikipedia on plexus aquatilis, and apparently no other reference in all of English language Wikipedia to this organism. When was it discovered, and why is it less significant than halicephalobus mephisto? All I could find is a useless stub of an article in Swedish Wikipedia that reads in its entirety (translated), "Plectus aquatilis is part of the genus Plectus, and the family Plectidae. The species is reproductive in Sweden." Maybe somebody knowledgeable can write an article on plectus aquatilis, or at least add a sentence or two to the halicephalobus mephisto article to explain why 'mephisto' is so much more significant than 'aquatilis'? Pascalulu88 (talk) 18:42, 4 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]