Talk:Archaeopterygiformes
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
Archaeopterygiformes is part 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. |
| Stub | This article has been rated as Stub-class on the quality scale. |
| ??? | This article has not yet received a rating on the importance scale. |
 |
Archaeopterygiformes is part of WikiProject Birds, an attempt at creating a standardized, informative and easy-to-use ornithological resource. If you would like to participate, visit the project page. Please do not substitute this template. |
| Start | This article has been rated as Start-Class on the quality scale. |
| Mid | This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the importance scale. |
|
WikiProject Birds To-do:
|
|
[edit] Families
Most families listed as belonging to Archaeopterygiformes are still classified as dinosaurs on their own pages. I'm not sure which classification is right (those families are dinosaurs if you ask me, though), so could someone clarify? Jerkov 20:54, 8 June 2006 (UTC)
- I've fixed some of the original research here and added an in-line cite. Paul, I think, is the only published source for placing other families in this group, but I'll look aorund to see if there are more. The pages themselves, espeically taxoboxes, should reflect current consensus.Dinoguy2 21:40, 8 June 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Deinonychosaurs share link with Archaeopteryx
Mayr et. al. (2005) showed that the specimen of Archaeopteryx they described has a hyperextendible second toe, as deinonychosaurs do. This would mean that the Deinonychosauria is part of Archaeopterygiformes. In this case, the group Deinonychosauria is included within Archaeopterygidae and splits into two subfamilies, Dromaeosaurinae and Troodontinae. The subfamily Dromaeosaurinae includes two tribes, Dromaeosaurini and Microraptorini.
Mayr, G., B. Pohl & D.S. Peters (2005). A well-preserved Archaeopteryx specimen with theropod features. Science 310 (5753): 1483-1486.
- Were those new family-level names actually published in Mayr? I've never heard of Dromaeosaurini, Microraptorini, etc. before. also, while I agree with this classification for the most part, it is not well supported enough in the literature yet to use it in wholesale changes to the dinosaur articles.Dinoguy2 01:31, 23 November 2006 (UTC)
