Talk:Palaeochiropteryx

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Palaeochiropteryx article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

A fact from Palaeochiropteryx appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know column on 24 May 2011 (check views). The text of the entry was as follows:

Did you know... that the many examples of extinct 48-million year old bat genus Palaeochiropteryx (life restoration pictured) found in the Messel lake may have drowned after being rendered unconscious in flight by poisonous volcanic gases?

A record of the entry may be seen at Wikipedia:Recent additions/2011/May.

Wikipedia

Palaeontology Low‑importance

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

Mammals: Bats Low‑importance

	Mammals portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Mammals, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of mammal-related subjects 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.MammalsWikipedia:WikiProject MammalsTemplate:WikiProject Mammalsmammal articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by Bats Task Force (assessed as Low-importance).

Species articles

Just a quick question for ObsidianSoul, are you thinking of covering the species in separate articles, or covering them in this article? --Kev min § 19:31, 16 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

No idea really. I just randomly came across this article and thought I could probably improve it relatively quickly, heh. :P I'll have to see what sources I can dig up tomorrow though. From preliminary searching I did earlier though, it looks like P. spiegeli is barely mentioned anywhere. Most of the literature available focus on P. tupaiodon and/or speaks about the genus in general. Both also come from the Messel Pit, from the same time range, with the same authorities. Splitting them off might result in too much repeated content and/or too little info on P. spiegeli and too much on P. tupaiodon.

I think it would be better to just discuss them here and redirect the member species? But what do you think? -- Obsidi♠n^Soul 20:18, 16 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

P.S. feel free to pitch in. You probably have better access to academic journals. :) -- Obsidi♠n^Soul 20:30, 16 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry for the late reply, life and all that. I was going to say I usually go for the "cover at the genus" method unless its an extinct species in a extant genus, but it looks like you decided to go that route anyways! I wish I did have access, but my uni access has expired for the summer. :-( The expansion is looking great though. :-) --Kev min § 17:21, 17 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah I'm beginning to see why the "cover at genus" approach is preferable. Species tend to be arbitrarily moved around a lot in paleontology and most genera seem to be monotypic. Anyway no worries, still trying to find other sources on this one. Strange it has so little info online given that it was at one time the oldest known bat fossil. They're all probably in print media. Meh. :[ Anyway cheers.-- Obsidi♠n^Soul 17:47, 18 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]