Talk:Evolution of mammalian auditory ossicles

message: Give the guy a chance to write it... Dicklyon 21:40, 17 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Hang on, new stub

message: I agree with the suggestion that this needs on-line references for the various statements made. (Not just a general bibliography, which the three items that I've listed are only a start on.) TomS TDotO (talk) 19:36, 9 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Right, and since you're the guy with the sources and the knowledge, it's up to you.  In my experience a general bibliography on wikipedia is worth exactly zero, whereas citations are very valuable, because they say what is verified in sources, so that anyone can help protent that information for the constant mutations that tend to go on for passives that are not anchored to a source.  Use template:Cite book, template:Cite journal, etc.  I can help if you're not clear on exactly how to proceed. Dicklyon (talk) 20:55, 9 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Citations needed

message: I noticed that in the Wikipedia articles on Reichert and on Gaupp that there is reference to the "Reichert-Gaupp Theory" of the origin of the mammalian auditory ossicles, and this seems to occur occasionally in the literature - Gaupp himself referred to the "Reichert Theory". Would it be appropriate to add the title "Reichert-Gaupp Theory" as an alias (if that's the right word) to this article? And also to make a cross-reference from those articles on Reichert and Gaupp? If so, I don't know how to add an alias. TomS TDotO (talk) 15:09, 18 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, I see there are books you can reference that call it that, and a redirect or two is in order (two because you'll want it both a hyphen and with the correct punctuation, an en dash, like several of the sources use). Dicklyon (talk) 02:00, 19 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, I tried it. I hope it works. I also put in a reference from the articles on Karl Bogislaus Reichert, Ernst Gaupp and Hans C. Bjerring, which perhaps covers all of the articles that mention it by name. I won't be insulted if someone corrects me on this. TomS TDotO (talk) 12:20, 19 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Reichert-Gaupp Theory

message: I'm about to start editing, as requested by TomS TDotO in Talk:Evolution of mammals. I can handle the paleontology from therapsids to mammals OK, and can probably push it back to basal amniotes and possibly even fish. But it would be a good idea for someone who knows mammal embryology to pitch in as well. Philcha (talk) 16:14, 29 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text:  I agree that it would be best to restrict it to the reptile-mammal transition for clarity.  Perhaps one section describing the change, then a section on evidence of the change, subdivided into morphological, embryological, fossil, and developmental/genetic? Mokele (talk) 16:46, 1 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: More content coming

message: I'll add to this as I go - others are welcome to add. 
* The Systems Biology of Hearing Evolution in Vertebrates translated from Chinese.
Currenty searching Google for "earliest first tympanum ear drum synapsid therapsid" Philcha (talk) 00:50, 1 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Refs that might be useful

message: I am thinking of adding a brief section at the end of this article, to be titled something like "Applications", which would mention a few of the results of our knowledge of the evolutionary history of the ossicles. I would like to hear some opinions from others before doing this. An example of what would be mentioned would be Shubin's ("Your Inner Fish") mention of the understanding of anatomy that comes from this knowledge. TomS TDotO (talk) 13:39, 12 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Applications

message: This should be discussed, shouldn't it? -- Spotty 11222 22:06, 9 October 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  ''[[Maotherium asiaticus]]'' 

message: Isn't the request for a citation for "other" fossils already filled by the section in this article on the fossils? The text at this point is mostly a summary of the whole article, rather than introducing new points, it seems to me. TomS TDotO (talk) 19:13, 15 February 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, being in the summary it seems OK.  On the other hand, if you have a source that supports that summary, that would be great to cite, too.  Dicklyon (talk) 21:22, 15 February 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Citation request for "other" fossils 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to  on Evolution of mammalian auditory ossicles. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add  after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add  to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20090501215705/http://www.gcssepm.org:80/special/cuffey_05.htm to http://www.gcssepm.org/special/cuffey_05.htm
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 07:35, 23 February 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified  on Evolution of mammalian auditory ossicles. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20080615211326/http://www.palaeos.com:80/Vertebrates/Units/430Mammalia/430.000.html to http://www.palaeos.com/Vertebrates/Units/430Mammalia/430.000.html
*Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20080511165601/http://www.palaeos.com/Vertebrates/Units/Unit390/200.html to http://www.palaeos.com/Vertebrates/Units/Unit390/200.html
*Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20080604160849/http://www.palaeos.com:80/Vertebrates/Units/Unit420/420.100.html to http://www.palaeos.com/Vertebrates/Units/Unit420/420.100.html
*Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20080703131229/http://www.palaeos.com:80/Vertebrates/Units/Unit420/420.300.html to http://www.palaeos.com/Vertebrates/Units/Unit420/420.300.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 04:35, 26 May 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: The Vancouver citation style has long been established in the article.  (and also ) has been replaced with  without explanation. The advantage of  is that is generates clean meta-data whereas  does not. In addition,  insures consistent author format.  With the current implementation of , first names are sometimes abbreviated and sometimes not. Hence I proposed to restored the previous citation style. Boghog (talk) 12:28, 21 January 2018 (UTC)
replies: text:  For the record, I don't agree, the article for several years used other styles, but I shall limit myself to regretting this unfortunate action. Chiswick Chap (talk) 13:41, 21 January 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Citation style