Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Pseudamphicyon


 * The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review).  No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was redirect‎__EXPECTED_UNCONNECTED_PAGE__ to Amphicyoninae. Noting Plantdrew's concerns, there still appears to be consensus for a redirect. Should that change, it can be remedied at RfD. It does not appear any further input is forthcoming here, nor has anyone refuted the concern. Star  Mississippi  02:21, 3 June 2023 (UTC)

Pseudamphicyon

 * – ( View AfD View log | edits since nomination)

As previously discussed in the talk page for Pseudamphicyon, this taxon is not valid anymore because its species are now considered synonyms for Simamphicyon, Cynodictis, and Cynelos. This is definitely confirmable because in a 1950 bulletin source, the two Pseudamphicyon species P. cayluxensis and P. crassidens are listed, with Cynodictis being considered species synonyms for the two, and they were attributed to Filhol in 1876-1877, and the 2020 sources state that Filhol erected those species of amphicyonids, considering them Cynodictis cayluxensis and Cynelos crassidens respectively. Additionally, the amphicyonids are well-researched, so a distinct lack of mentions of the genus in modern day academic research is pretty telling as well. PrimalMustelid (talk) 17:54, 18 May 2023 (UTC)
 * Tagging @FunkMonk and @Hemiauchenia for some input on whether the page should be deleted or made into a redirect based on discussions by other users. PrimalMustelid (talk) 23:34, 20 May 2023 (UTC)
 * Automated comment: This AfD was not correctly transcluded to the log (step 3). I have transcluded it to Articles for deletion/Log/2023 May 18.  —cyberbot I   Talk to my owner :Online 18:15, 18 May 2023 (UTC)
 * Comment. You don't have to delete an invalid taxon's article. You can redirect it to the correct taxon, or you can edit the article to say that the taxon is invalid and has been replaced with the new taxon, and have a link to the new taxon. As an example, Bos americanus, an invalid old name for the American bison, redirects to American bison. Eastmain (talk • contribs) 18:22, 18 May 2023 (UTC)
 * Just so. Reclassification should generally result in redirection since it tends to generate a valid synonym (barring edge cases like the Hoser herpetology rampage). Redirect to Amphicyoninae and add a note about the reclassification there. -- Elmidae (talk · contribs) 10:18, 19 May 2023 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 01:20, 26 May 2023 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Animal and Organisms.  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 18:44, 18 May 2023 (UTC)
 * Redirect to Amphicyonidae per nom. Hemiauchenia (talk) 23:35, 20 May 2023 (UTC)
 * Redirect - synonyms should always be redirected, as they are still possible search terms. FunkMonk (talk) 08:54, 21 May 2023 (UTC)
 * Redirect to Amphicyoninae per Elmidae and per the talk page discussion. --Tserton (talk) 15:22, 22 May 2023 (UTC)
 * Comment I'm not comfortable redirecting to Amphicyoninae. If it is a synonym, it should be redirected to the genus that it is a synonym of, not the subfamily. But I haven't had any success figuring out which species is the type species, which is necessary to determine whether Pseudamphicyon is a synonym of Cynodictis or Cynelos. Plantdrew (talk) 19:57, 24 May 2023 (UTC)
 *  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.


 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.