Talk:Tusoteuthis

This article is written in Canadian English, which has its own spelling conventions (colour, centre, travelled, realize, analyze) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus.

Cephalopods (inactive)

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Cephalopods, a project which is currently considered to be inactive.CephalopodsWikipedia:WikiProject CephalopodsTemplate:WikiProject CephalopodsCephalopods articles

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

United States: Colorado / North Dakota / Wyoming Mid‑importance

	United States portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions. Template Usage Articles Requested! Become a Member Project Talk Alerts United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
	Colorado portal This article is supported by WikiProject Colorado, our collaboration to create, improve, and update Wikipedia articles about the U.S. State of Colorado. To comment about this article, select the Add topic tab above. For questions about, or to make suggestions for Colorado articles, go to our project's talk page. We invite you to join us!
	North Dakota portal This article is supported by WikiProject North Dakota.
	Wyoming portal This article is supported by WikiProject Wyoming.

South Dakota Mid‑importance

	South Dakota portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject South Dakota, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the U.S. state of South Dakota 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 DakotaWikipedia:WikiProject South DakotaTemplate:WikiProject South DakotaSouth Dakota articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Canada: Manitoba Mid‑importance

	Canada portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Canada, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Canada 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.CanadaWikipedia:WikiProject CanadaTemplate:WikiProject CanadaCanada-related articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Manitoba.

Kansas Mid‑importance

	Kansas portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Kansas, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the U.S. state of Kansas 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.KansasWikipedia:WikiProject KansasTemplate:WikiProject KansasKansas articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Enchoteuthis?

With the publication of a recent paper,^[1] it seems that Tusoteuthis might be a nomen dubium, and Enchoteuthis might be valid. Thoughts? Borophagus (talk) 13:52, 5 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 10 March 2021

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.

It was proposed in this section that Tusoteuthis be renamed and moved to Enchoteuthis.

result:
Procedural close. The nom has created Enchoteuthis, so as an article with significant content, its title becomes ineligible as a "new" title in a move request. Thank you for the new article! Kudos to all editors for your input, and Happy, Healthy Publishing! (nac by page mover) P.I. Ellsworth ed. ^put'r there 14:07, 28 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Links: current log • target log

This is template {{subst:Requested move/end}}

Tusoteuthis → Enchoteuthis – With the publication of a recent paper,^[1] it seems that Tusoteuthis might be a nomen dubium, and Enchoteuthis, which was named later than Tusoteuthis, may be the valid name. This does not appear to have been picked up as of yet, and it may be somewhat controversial, so I'm putting in a move request.

References

^ ^a ^b Fuchs, D., Iba, Y., Heyng, A., Iijima, M., Klug, C., Larson, N.L., & Schweigert, G. (2020). The Muensterelloidea: phylogeny and character evolution of Mesozoic stem octopods. Papers in Palaeontology, 6(1), 31-92.

– Borophagus (talk) 13:52, 5 March 2021 (UTC) Borophagus (talk) 10:38, 10 March 2021 (UTC) —Relisting. ~ Aseleste (t, e | c, l) 00:41, 23 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose This is a well-cited article, I don't think that one paper can overturn what all the other references are saying. 162.208.168.92 (talk) 19:06, 26 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

But the given references are just going along with the consensus of their time, which was Tusoteuthis being valid because nobody really checked (or officiated) whether the name was even viable based on taxonomic rules. The new source simply made that check and found that the taxon isn't following the rules, so this can only be disputed in a future study that argues that the type specimen is indeed rule-abiding (which is unlikely IMO). Macrophyseter | talk 21:32, 26 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Given how the holotype is described I doubt that the declaration of Tusoteuthis as a nomen dubium will be challenged in the future. However, it's important to remember that this does not necessarily mean that Enchoteuthis is the "correct name" but rather the authors argue that many of the more complete fossils traditionally attributed to Tusoteuthis better align with Enchoteuthis. In other words, the holotype wasn't reidentified, just diagnostically meaningless. I would personally wait for more papers on the taxonomic issue that follow-up the situation before making a conclusive opinion on merging/renaming, but for now I recommend creating Enchoteuthis as a separate article page, adapting the non-taxonomic contents of this article there, and editing this article is that it reflects the taxon's dubious status. Macrophyseter | talk 21:24, 26 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I think that's probably the best course of action for now, now that some additional points have been made. I'll try and get to work on a separate Enchoteuthis article now, I think.Borophagus (talk) 08:56, 28 March 2021 (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.

[fuchsetal2020-1] Fuchs, D., Iba, Y., Heyng, A., Iijima, M., Klug, C., Larson, N.L., & Schweigert, G. (2020). The Muensterelloidea: phylogeny and character evolution of Mesozoic stem octopods. Papers in Palaeontology, 6(1), 31-92.

[1]