Talk:Anachlysictis

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 1 one external link on Anachlysictis. 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/20111123005936/http://scienceblogs.com/tetrapodzoology/2008/07/borhyaenoids_part_three.php to http://scienceblogs.com/tetrapodzoology/2008/07/borhyaenoids_part_three.php

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

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 07:21, 12 October 2016 (UTC)

Synonymous with Thylacosmilus?
It seems various authors have considered this genus synonymous with Thylacosmilus, according to this article by Darren Naish, but this article doesn't mention it anywhere, and it is written as if both are distinct. So here's a ping to, who started the article. FunkMonk (talk) 11:50, 1 February 2018 (UTC)
 * Hehe, that's a little mistake: the proposed synonymy is with Achlysictis, which is basically remains of Thylacosmilus identified by Ameghino (as Hyaenodontops and Notosmilus). Is not the same case that Anachlysictis, which in first place, is from the Middle Miocene and is just known from La Venta fauna of Colombia and is more primitive and smaller than its southern relative. Is worth to note that Anachlysisctis means "toward Achlysictis" because when was named, the issue of the names of Thylacosmilus was not defined. In the description of Anachlysictis the author wrote "In their recent review of the biology and taxonomy of the South American thylacosmilids, Goin and Pascual (1987) concluded that all remains of this family could be regarded as a single species. Invoking Article 23a of the International Code of Zoological Nomenclature, we proposed to keep the name Thylacosmilus atrox Riggs, 1933 instead of Achlysictis lelongi Ameghino 1891, which would strictly correspond in terms of priority. Our recommendation to recognize a name that has been widely known for more than fifty years had no success" (Goin, 1997, p. 201) Apparently, researchers simply continues using Thylacosmilus by convenience, but I don't known if the ICZN has concluded about this case.--Rextron (talk) 06:15, 2 February 2018 (UTC)
 * Oh, of course, hehe, so similar names, I misread... As for Achlysictis, I wonder what we should do with that here? Would maybe be premature to redirect it? And by the way, I'm trying to get Thylacosmilus to GA/FA, you're welcome if you want to join in... FunkMonk (talk) 08:43, 2 February 2018 (UTC)
 * Even in this year, this book still says something nearly identical to the Goin's cite that I reproduced before... I would prefer to redirect it to Thylacosmilus and made a note, or even a small section about the status of the names given to Thylacosmilus, reflecting that is still awaiting a formal response. Well, I'm interested in help to improve he article, since that many of the emblematic SA extinct mammals needs better content, just let me know what I could do. --Rextron (talk) 08:38, 3 February 2018 (UTC)
 * Yeah, I was thinking you might be interested in getting more attention to a South American mammal. In the case of Thylacosmilus, some of the papers seem to be in Spanish, so perhaps that could be a place to start? My high school Spanish is not very good... I will explain the situation of Achlysictis in the taxonomy section then... FunkMonk (talk) 13:04, 3 February 2018 (UTC)
 * Ok then, I'll look for some of the papers in Spanish to provide more content.--Rextron (talk) 09:16, 4 February 2018 (UTC)
 * Sources 12 and 22 are in Spanish at least, though with some English summaries. FunkMonk (talk) 12:42, 4 February 2018 (UTC)
 * If you want to collaborate on this and co-nominate,, is there any sections you would prefer to write? I have requested some papers here, I can send them if you need any. FunkMonk (talk) 15:41, 12 February 2018 (UTC)
 * Hmm, I didn't think in a particular section, although maybe some about the paleoecology. About the papers, have you find the Quiroga's paper about the brain? that's the another one in Spanish that I could use. --Rextron (talk) 09:00, 13 February 2018 (UTC)
 * Do you mean the one with the cerebral cortex? Still waiting for that. But if you mean the Quiroga/Dozo 1988 paper, I have it. FunkMonk (talk) 18:24, 13 February 2018 (UTC)
 * I just found the Quiroga paper in Ameghiniana... :-D Thanks, anyways. I'll start to read it and add some info.--Rextron (talk) 20:00, 13 February 2018 (UTC)
 * Do you know French, ? Because I just got Argot 2002, and it's all in French... I still need one paper requested here before I have the entire literature to begin... FunkMonk (talk) 19:53, 6 April 2018 (UTC)
 * Well, I known enough French to undestand a paleontology paper ;) so I can help you with the work of Argot. So, the paper that you need is "in process"? If you want, I could start to add the content from Argot, unless that you consider better only start when the info be complete.--Rextron (talk) 00:37, 7 April 2018 (UTC)
 * I can send you the pdf and anything else you need (any relevant papers you want?), and you can add the info at any time you want. I'll still be focusing on the taxonomy section for a while... FunkMonk (talk) 10:27, 7 April 2018 (UTC)