Category talk:Gomphotheriidae

This is not vandalism; those genuses, that I took out, don't belong anymore to the Gomphotheriidae family. DenesFeri (talk) 16:08, 28 August 2019 (UTC)

Yes DenesFeri, but the list of genera that you modified is sourced and dated. You cannot change what TPDB says.

What you can do is add another list. Please provide a source and and access-date, otherwise it has no sense. It could be your own list.

Regards Liné1 (talk) 16:30, 28 August 2019 (UTC)

I corrected the taxonomy according to the enwiki and huwiki lists. Below are the refrence lists. DenesFeri (talk) 16:36, 28 August 2019 (UTC)

• (2016. január 5.) „Morphological and ecological diversity of Amebelodontidae (Proboscidea, Mammalia) revealed by a Miocene fossil accumulation of an upper-tuskless proboscidean”. Journal of Systematic Palaeontology. DOI:10.1080/14772019.2016.1208687.
• (2016. január 12.) „The Dance of Tusks: Rediscovery of Lower Incisors in the Pan-American Proboscidean Cuvieronius hyodon Revises Incisor Evolution in Elephantimorpha”. PLoS ONE. DOI:10.1371/journal.pone.0147009.
• Lambert, David (1992) "The feeding habits of the shovel-tusked gomphotheres: Evidence from tusk wear patterns" Paleobiology 18.2 https://www.jstor.org/stable/pdfplus/2400995.pdf Retrieved October 2012
• Mothé D, Ferretti MP, Avilla LS (2016) "The Dance of Tusks: Rediscovery of Lower Incisors in the Pan-American Proboscidean Cuvieronius hyodon Revises Incisor Evolution in Elephantimorpha". PLoS ONE 11(1): e0147009. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0147009
• Şahin, Serkan. „Choerolophodontinae from the Miocene of Anatolia Dispersals and Paleoecology”.
• J. Shoshani and P. Tassy. 2005. "Advances in proboscidean taxonomy & classification, anatomy & physiology, and ecology & behavior". Quaternary International 126-128:5-20
• Revision of Pleistocenic Gomphotheriidae fauna in Colombia and case report in the department of Valle del Cauca, Scientific Bulletin. Museum Center - Natural History Museum, 78–85. o. (2009) Archiválva

Hello DenesFeri,

You don't seem to understand the concept of sourced data.

• TPDB said on 12-23-2018 that the list is A,B,C. You cannot modify the page to TPDB said on 12-23-2018 that the list is A, B. It is so obviously wrong. Even for non science. No journalist would do that. (Ok, maybe they would ;-))
• You can totally add another list of genera. I did it for you.
• As you can see the new list of genera the source= is not provided. In wikicommons, the contributers are expected to provide proof (In biology we call it dated source). This can be done with parameters |source= or |ref=. Please looks at {{Genera}} documentation. I tried to make it helpful.

  you must understand that your long list of references have no value:

  • They are not placed in the category page (thee must be a link between the information and the reference !!!)
  • No one can check them (you provided no internet link)

Please understand that I am not rejecting the taxonomic data you provided.

I am rejecting the way you provided them.

Regards Liné1 (talk) 08:22, 29 August 2019 (UTC)