Talk:The Big Five

Dear Levine 2112, Hi, I'm Dale. I need to ask you something: is my latest article, The "Big Five", acceptable? Also, I have attempted to provide reliable resources, but there is only little numbers, and no "Works Cited" list on the bottom. Can you help me correct this? Thanks. --Dale S. Satre (talk) 02:36, 18 July 2008 (UTC)
 * This could be a nice start. I think you just need to establish that the term "The Big Five" is a notable term. The National Geographic article may do just that. The 5 extinction events seem to have their own articles already on Wikipedia, so I'd say just continue what you are doing. Describe each period briefly, but leave full descriptions of each event to their individual Wiki articles. I did some formating, grammatical and spelling clean-up work and check out how I consolidate ref tags. Once you give an instance of a ref a name, then you just need to refer to the name in other occurrences of the ref. Look at the code - you'll see. I an going to try and get some Paleontologist expert Wiki help over here, but in the meantime, feel free to ask me for more help. Welcome! -- Levine2112 discuss 05:19, 18 July 2008 (UTC)


 * One thing I would advise is to carefully check the content of this article against that of "extinction event". I suspect that there may be proposals to merge these two articles, especially as the end-Ediacaran and holocene extinction events were arguably as major as the traditional "big five".  I would personally be inclined to place the content that you are developing here in the "Major extinction events" section of extinction event to minimise content duplication.
 * It may also be worth asking for opinions at WikiProject Extinction.
 * Martin  (Smith609 – Talk)  08:04, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

I recommend the Merger
I mean no offense (if any) to the author, but i do recommend this article is merged.--Archeopteryx (talk) 23:33, 21 September 2008 (UTC)