Talk:List of extinct animals
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
This article is part of WikiProject Extinction, an attempt at creating a standardized, informative, comprehensive and easy-to-use resource on extinct animals, extinct plants and extinction in general. If you would like to participate, you can choose to edit this article, or visit the project page for more information. |
"Dinosaurs, and a large number of historical orders are extinct... It is, however, generally accepted that birds are descended from a subgroup of dinosaurs - hence dinosaurs are not extinct."
Contradictory statements, I'm no expert but I'd say despite birds being descended from dinosaurs, they are Not dinosaurs. Therefore the latter are extinct. 194.168.3.18 14:23, 10 Aug 2004 (UTC)
- From a cladistic point of view, birds are dinosaurs. However, this is completely irrelevant in this article that should only give some examples of extinct animals. Therefore I deleted the sentence. The facts are explained much better in the articles bird and dinosaur. -- Baldhur 15:54, 10 Aug 2004 (UTC)
Contents |
[edit] Europe
The section on Europe seems to have been deleted, will attempt to fix :p Grunners 02:44, 21 Nov 2004 (UTC)
[edit] Global vs. regional/local extinctions
It would be useful to note that this page lists species that have gone extinct throughout their entire range, rather than those that are "extinct" in certain countries or regions. A separate page could be made to list these latter "regional extinctions."
- Regional extinction is, in my opinion, a loaded term. I'd prefer to use 'loss of range', 'loss of habitat', etc. I don't mind adding 'substantial loss of range' when that is the case. But, it's like Mount Lemon's squirrels... AFAIK, they exist in other places...
- ~ender 2005-06-01 21:40:MST
[edit] Article assessment
Wikipedia:Article assessment is looking at extinct mammals from the week starting 20 February 2006 - please come along and help out with the submissions and assessments. violet/riga (t) 00:13, 20 February 2006 (UTC)
- Sadly the findings haven't been very good - most articles only scored around 6 out of 10. violet/riga (t) 00:08, 5 March 2006 (UTC)
- Indeed sad, but the articles can still be improved! So everyone feel free to do so. All help is welcome. Pmaas 15:59, 5 March 2006 (UTC)
- They certainly can. Hopefully the comments at WP:AA will help with this. violet/riga (t) 16:30, 5 March 2006 (UTC)
- Indeed sad, but the articles can still be improved! So everyone feel free to do so. All help is welcome. Pmaas 15:59, 5 March 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Merge proposal "No longer considered extinct" and Lazerus taxon
It has been suggested by Biatch that the "No longer considered extinct" section be merged with Lazarus taxon. I agree with this merger. And because this list is of extinct animals, not living or rediscovered animals, I think it can be merged now. Peter Maas 07:43, 25 August 2006 (UTC)
