# Talk:Aristonectes

O'Keefe et al. (2017) recover Morturneria as valid: [1] Lythronaxargestes (talk | contribs) 16:32, 31 August 2017 (UTC)

Aristonectes has been nominated for a good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. Amirani1746 (talk) 13:22, 31 October 2024 (UTC)

Amirani1746 added an orange "update needed" banner to the article with this edit in November 2024. Is this banner still valid? If so, should this article go to WP:GAR? Z1720 (talk) 21:16, 4 November 2025 (UTC)

Z1720, i think you can remove it, but note that the article validity is not finish. Amirani1746 (talk) 09:45, 5 November 2025 (UTC)
@Amirani1746: What do you mean by "article validity"? Z1720 (talk) 13:04, 5 November 2025 (UTC)
Z1720 In fact, after checking, I realized that the article glosses over a lot of details actually told by the sources, and that it deserves to be updated later. Amirani1746 (talk) 13:20, 5 November 2025 (UTC)
@Amirani1746: Can you please outline the general topics that need to be updated so that editors can address them? Reliable sources can be added to the "Further reading" section of the article if you don't get the chance to use them as inline citations. If significant amounts of the article need to be updated, should this article go to WP:GAR? Z1720 (talk) 13:26, 5 November 2025 (UTC)
Z1720, That's what I wanted to do, but I didn't understand how to do it... Amirani1746 (talk) 14:53, 5 November 2025 (UTC).
@Amirani1746: You can list them below if you want. If editors have questions about the banner, they will come to the talk page and hopefully see this thread. Z1720 (talk) 14:54, 5 November 2025 (UTC)
Z1720 Let’s just say the entire page needs an update. I expanded it at a time when I didn’t yet have enough experience writing articles about relatively complex taxa. Moreover, since I’m an active contributor to the French Wikipedia, I’ve prepared a draft intended to correct the errors in this article. And since I don’t plan to expand it any further for now, I request that its Good Article status should be removed.Amirani1746 (talk) 15:08, 5 November 2025 (UTC).
@Amirani1746: Thanks for this. Can you be more specific below? Can you give examples of what exactly missing from the article or outdated? This will help other editors understand why the article doesn't meet the GA criteria. Z1720 (talk) 15:22, 5 November 2025 (UTC)
Here's my list :
Missing important details (notably in research history)
Not following recent scientific litterature
Sorry, for the late response, i was busy. Amirani1746 (talk) 16:13, 5 November 2025 (UTC)
@Amirani1746: What specific important details are missing? What specific scientific literature sources are missing from the article? Please give examples. Z1720 (talk) 16:25, 5 November 2025 (UTC)
Z1720 For me, the article does not meet the GA criteria, as a significant portion of the scientific literature concerning this plesiosaur is not cited — something you can see in my draft — which makes the article incomplete and lacking in depth. Amirani1746 (talk) 16:32, 5 November 2025 (UTC)