Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Saldamosaurus


 * 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 delete. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 16:37, 16 December 2017 (UTC)

Saldamosaurus

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

A dubious taxon, named in a journal of dubious reliability (Dinologia) should not be on Wikipedia, as it violates our core principle of verifiability. RileyBugz 会話投稿記録 17:16, 9 December 2017 (UTC)


 * Delete - I tried to communicate with the editor, but there has been no response. The taxon (like several others from the same editor) is flaky, and the source is useless. I couldn't find anything better, either. Chiswick Chap (talk) 18:00, 9 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Science-related deletion discussions. XOR&#39;easter (talk) 19:04, 9 December 2017 (UTC)


 * Delete - No reliable sourcing appears to exist. Editor appears to have a bit of a sideline in these; see also Saraikimasoom, Saldamosauridae. -- Elmidae (talk · contribs) 19:58, 9 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Delete - the article itself says that this stegosaurus belongs to a dubious genus. A citation is given in the main text, but no references appear at the end of the article. Is this article a hoax? I am sure it would not be too surprising to find it is. Vorbee (talk) 20:24, 9 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Delete Needs a reliable source. And Taxonomy/Saldamosauridae should get deleted along with Saldamosauridae. Plantdrew (talk) 20:31, 9 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Delete per WP:RS. Natureium (talk) 00:09, 10 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Comment: From http://www.dinochecker.com/dinosaurs/NATRONASAURUS, and similar articles at Sinopeltosaurus, Amargastegos, Andhrasaurus, etc, it does not appear to be a hoax, and Galton&Carpenter would be Galton, Peter M. & Carpenter, Kenneth, 2016, "The plated dinosaur Stegosaurus longispinus Gilmore, 1914 (Dinosauria: Ornithischia; Upper Jurassic, western USA), type species of Alcovasaurus n. gen.", Neues Jahrbuch für Geologie und Paläontologie - Abhandlungen 279(2): 185-208 . Suggest that the Ulansky-related articles require a broader examination/determination. ~Hydronium~Hydroxide~(Talk)~ 01:00, 10 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Yes, but the Galton and Carpenter article says that the taxons named by Ulansky do not conform to the ICZN, thus making this taxon invalid. RileyBugz 会話投稿記録 01:21, 10 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Animal-related deletion discussions. North America1000 21:20, 11 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of History-related deletion discussions. North America1000 21:20, 11 December 2017 (UTC)


 * Delete. Base on one article (which isn't cited in this article) more or less,, not determined to be a taxon later by others. Hardly any mention of this taxon later.Icewhiz (talk) 21:39, 11 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Delete does not meet notability guidelines if the name is invalid (laughably described in the ref above as "serial-self-publishing shenanigans"). (Question to the experts: Is a redirect feasible to another validly-named page? Nick Moyes (talk) 02:06, 15 December 2017 (UTC)


 * 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.