Talk:Allenby Formation

Geology Low‑importance

	Geology portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Geology, an attempt at creating a standardized, informative, comprehensive and easy-to-use geology resource. If you would like to participate, you can choose to edit this article, or visit the project page for more information.GeologyWikipedia:WikiProject GeologyTemplate:WikiProject GeologyGeology
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Canada: British Columbia 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
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject British Columbia.

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

Section sizes

Section size for Allenby Formation (28 sections)
Section name	Byte count	Section total
(Top)	2,370	2,370
Extent and correlation	5,134	5,134
Age	1,061	1,061
Lithology	1,519	1,519
Palynoflora	8,815	8,815
Compression paleobiota	2,112	51,760
Bryophytes	1,703	1,703
Pteridophytes	695	695
Gingkophytes	851	851
Pinophytes	4,132	4,132
Angiosperms	12,275	12,275
Mollusks	1,453	1,453
Insects	14	23,855
Coleopterans	3,105	3,105
Dipterans	8,471	8,471
Hemipterans	4,802	4,802
Hymenopterans	3,246	3,246
Mecopterans	1,239	1,239
Neuropterans	1,185	1,185
Odonata	1,121	1,121
Raphidiopterans	672	672
Vertebrates	4,684	4,684
Princeton Chert biota	667	18,968
Fungi	1,467	1,467
Ferns	2,785	2,785
Conifers	2,232	2,232
Angiosperms	11,817	11,817
References	270	270
Total	89,897	89,897

A fact from Allenby Formation appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know column on 17 November 2021 (check views). The text of the entry was as follows:

Did you know... that the Allenby Formation has been called part of a "Great Canadian Lagerstätte"?

A record of the entry may be seen at Wikipedia:Recent additions/2021/November. The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Allenby Formation.

Wikipedia

Proposed merge from Princeton Chert

Subtopic of the Allenby formation, with much shared/same information— Preceding unsigned comment added by Kevmin (talk • contribs) 21:15, 23 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I disagree with the idea of merging the Princeton Chert article with the Allenby Formation article. The Princeton Chert is a significant Eocene fossil site, and the article highlights this point. It is therefore more a paleontology article than an article about a rock formation. Eocene guy (talk) 22:27, 21 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Did you know nomination

The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was: promoted by SL93 (talk) 01:14, 13 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

(

Comment or view
Article history

)

... that the Allenby Formation has been called part of a "Great Canadian Lagerstätte"? Source: "Archibald et al 2011)
- ALT1: ... that the Allenby Formation has been compared to the Virunga Mountains in the African rift valley? Source: "DeVore 2020" )
Note: Reviewed Euphorbia nivulia of the nomination.

Reviewed: Euphorbia caducifolia

Created/expanded by Kevmin (talk). Self-nominated at 23:06, 26 October 2021 (UTC).[reply]

over 5x expansion from 419 to 7196 bytes; all sources appear reliable (based on Google searches); every paragraph, quote, and list entry is cited; article neutral; no copyvio detected (AGF on paywalled sources). Hooks are cited, not long, and interesting; ALT0 is good to go, but ALT1 (and the sentence in the article) needs clarification on what "compared" entails (are they similar? In which aspects?). QPQ done. eviolite (talk) 23:21, 12 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]