Talk:List of dinosaurs

Queries

This list, taken wholesale from enWP (minus the introduction), is of doubtful use to simpleWP as it contains so many items which will never be linked, and this makes it more difficult to find those which are linked. It also includes synonyms and invalid names, also unlinked. I think what would be uselful is to list only those genera for which we actually do have articles. That might be useful. We could then give a link to the full enWP list. Macdonald-ross (talk) 09:53, 3 March 2010 (UTC)

Cuts

Today cut nomina nuda; left Mesozoic birds; left junior synonyms; cut other non-dinosaurs; cut mis-spellings (potentially infinite in number). Rationale: not useful in this wiki, where only one in ten genera have pages, and the readers are not specialists. Consistent with my previous comments. Macdonald-ross (talk) 06:07, 23 September 2010 (UTC)

Thank you for your help, Macdonald-ross! :) I think it was a little surprising for you to cut such large amounts from the article, but I suppose it was necessary. Next time, though, perhaps you could consider to let people know on the talk page before you cut unnecessary things out, not after. Anyway, thank you much for your concerns on the article. Warmly, Belle ^{tête-à-tête} 06:11, 23 September 2010 (UTC)

Oh, but I did! The passage above was clear enough. If anyone disagreed they had ample time to respond. No correct scientific name of a dinosaur has been cut out. And I would say that no-one should import these huge lists from enWP without adapting them to Simple needs. That's fundamental to our remit, isn't it?
In project Chess I pointed out that there were over 1,500 living chess Grandmasters, and that a list that long would be quite useless. So far, everyone has been happy with the shorter edited list which resulted. Macdonald-ross (talk) 06:53, 23 September 2010 (UTC)