Godzillus: This article was created back in 2012, when at the time the subject was getting attention in the press for being a "mystery fossil that stumps scientists".  After that, however, almost nothing new has been written about it since, except a 2016 study by the fossil's discoverer and other scientists discussing its possible true identity.  Alternatively to deletion, this article could be merged into Kope Formation instead, since the fossil was discovered from that formation in the first place.  Monster Iestyn ( talk ) 12:24, 24 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Biology and Organisms .  Monster Iestyn ( talk ) 12:24, 24 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Merge as per nom.   I was able to find several articles in RS from the time of discovery, including the CBC and Columbus Dispatch, so it did attract attention.   But there hasn't been much since then and doubtful there will be.  WP:NOTNEWS .  — Preceding unsigned comment added by WeirdNAnnoyed ( talk • contribs ) 14:01, 24 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Comment: A glance at Google Scholar indicates the subject is still being researched and published about, with a new paper coming out every two years.  Maybe this material could be incorporated into the article.  -- dsprc [talk] 15:39, 24 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] @ Dsprc Careful, some of those papers listed on Google Scholar may be referring to a crustacean with the similiar name "Godzill i us", not the subject of this article.  Those that are referring to this subject only mention it in passing, with the exception of the article from 2016 I already mentioned which as far as I can see is the only one actually discussing it.  Monster Iestyn ( talk ) 16:06, 24 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Good point.  At least these two journals discuss this specific subject (not the similarly-named one): doi : 10.2110/palo.2016.028 && doi : 10.1080/08912963.2020.1755281 .  I've zero interest in digging through paleontological research papers that are dryer than a fossil, however.  Thus, YMMV on the others.  -- dsprc [talk] 16:19, 24 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Merge as per nom.  Having easy access to Meyer et al. (2016) and Retallack and Broz (2021), I looked both of them up.  Meyer et al. (2016) is undecided about whether Godzillus is a true fossil or a pseudofossil that is a Microbially induced sedimentary structure .  Retallack and Broz (2021) mentions only in passing that Godzillus is regarded to be an a Ediacaran multilobed frond.  This paper neither describes nor discusses it any further, except to note that Godzillus is preoccupied by the "orthographic variant Gozillius robustus, a remipede crustacean."  It is too soon for Godzillus to have its own Wikipedia article as this time.  I would recommend that this article be merged as a paragraph in the Kope Formation .  References: Meyer, D.L., Brett, C.E., Dattilo, B.F. and Fine, R., 2016.  Inverted trilobites: key to complex preservation of an organically textured surface in offshore siliciclastic mudstone and carbonate facies: Kope Formation (upper Ordovician), Kenton County, Kentucky, USA.  Palaios, 31(10), pp.453-462.  Retallack, G.J. and Broz, A.P., 2021.  Arumberia and other Ediacaran–Cambrian fossils of central Australia.  Historical Biology, 33(10), pp.1964-1988.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Paul H. ( talk • contribs ) 19:05, 24 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Merge I support the merge.  I haven't been able to expand the article. -- Auric talk 19:32, 24 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Comment I have looked extensively using various databases and not been able find any addition publications that discuss Godzillus in addition to Meyer et al. (2016) and Retallack and Broz (2021) Paul H. ( talk ) 20:34, 26 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Merge , it 's a no brainer.  Clearly it fails GNC and cant survive as a stand alone article.  Cinadon 36 07:02, 26 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Merge I agree with what’s been said.  Merge.  Go4thProsper ( talk ) 10:47, 26 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] 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.

Discussion outcome: merge