Talk:Elpistostegalia

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Elpistostegalia 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

Fishes Mid‑importance

	Fish portal This article is part of WikiProject Fishes, an attempt to organise a detailed guide to all topics related to Fish taxa. To participate, you can edit the attached article, or contribute further at WikiProject Fishes. This project is an offshoot of the WikiProject Tree of Life.FishesWikipedia:WikiProject FishesTemplate:WikiProject FishesFishes
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Palaeontology: Lobe-Fins 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.
	This article is supported by the Lobe-Fins task force (assessed as Mid-importance).

where do Alligator Gars fit in?

Alligator_gar 2605:A601:46C:4101:CABC:C8FF:FEA5:82F4 (talk) 01:48, 27 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

They don't. Aligator gars are Actinopterygiians, representing the other main branch of the bony fish tree. They may have been ecologically similar though. Petter Bøckman (talk) 09:01, 6 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Possible WP:UNDUE

This article has two items in the taxobox that look like possible WP:UNDUE: the taxon Eotetrapodiformes, and placing Tetrapoda as a subtaxon of Elpistostegalia. Even though legitimate references for these items can be found on Google Scholar, both seem to represent novel hypotheses or novel taxonomies. "New ideas" are almost by definition minority viewpoints, since it takes time for scholars to decide if they agree with them. Eotetrapodiformes only gets 4 hits on Google Scholar, so I think that's a no. The other one is harder to figure out, since you can't just count hits on that one. However, I've read plenty about the phylogeny of tetrapodomorph fishes, and have never before encountered this idea until I saw it here. Zyxwv99 (talk) 01:36, 30 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Elpistostegalia. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110813153431/http://ciresweb.colorado.edu/limnology/pubs/pdfs/Pub001.pdf to http://ciresweb.colorado.edu/limnology/pubs/pdfs/Pub001.pdf

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 05:49, 23 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]