Talk:Panthera gombaszoegensis
good and 1.0 standards, or visit the wikiproject page for more details. | ||
High | This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale. |
Mammals Low‑importance | |||||||
|
Palaeontology Low‑importance | |||||||
|
It is requested that an image or photograph be included in this article to improve its quality. Please replace this template with a more specific media request template where possible.
The Free Image Search Tool or Openverse Creative Commons Search may be able to locate suitable images on Flickr and other web sites. |
Requested move
- The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the move request was: moved. ErikHaugen (talk | contribs) 23:35, 1 December 2011 (UTC)
- Support -- Standard capitalisation. Peterkingiron (talk) 16:37, 1 December 2011 (UTC)
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.
Pictures
Hi! Looking at this file, is it possible to get pictures of fossils and the reconstitution of this cat? --92.142.49.232 (talk) 16:54, 19 October 2013 (UTC)
Page views
Graphs are unavailable due to technical issues. There is more info on Phabricator and on MediaWiki.org. |
Leo1pard (talk) 16:14, 14 January 2018 (UTC)
Request Move
- I propose to move European jaguar to Panthera gombaszoegensis. Reason: the current title of 'European jaguar' is misleading (most do not consider it a subspecies of jaguar); also for consistency- the majority of other prehistoric cats are under their binomial name (Panthera crassidens, Panthera youngi, Panthera zdanskyi, etc.]]).--SilverTiger12 (talk) 14:10, 16 November 2018 (UTC)]
Move discussion in progress
There is a move discussion in progress on
Merge proposal
Both
- The age for P. gombaszoegensis in this article is also wrong, this article indicates that they were still extant after 424 kya, well after the supposed "1.95−1.77 million years ago" range, given this I also think the first appearance date is also likely to be inaccurate. Hemiauchenia (talk) 00:18, 17 August 2020 (UTC)
- Actually the paper gives an upper range of 2.0 Mya, so near dead on. Also I would recommend WP:BOLDLY merging. Hemiauchenia (talk) 00:21, 17 August 2020 (UTC)]
- The thing is, I effectively began the merge process a long time ago, transferring all the relevant information and sources to this article from the other. This is kind of the final nail in the coffin- if the consensus is to merge, then I will blank and redirect the two articles. --SilverTiger12 (talk) 00:28, 17 August 2020 (UTC)
- Actually the paper gives an upper range of 2.0 Mya, so near dead on. Also I would recommend
- Seems to be ok to redirect these 2 into this page, as several authors agreed with Hemmer's assessment of them being junior synonyms. -- BhagyaMani (talk) 06:30, 17 August 2020 (UTC)
I have redirected those two pages to this one. Unfortunately, I do not have the experience or knowledge to mess with the images.--SilverTiger12 (talk) 01:45, 27 August 2020 (UTC)