Talk:Compsognathidae

Dinosaurs Low‑importance

	Dinosaurs portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Dinosaurs, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of dinosaurs and dinosaur-related topics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.DinosaursWikipedia:WikiProject DinosaursTemplate:WikiProject Dinosaursdinosaurs
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Palaeontology Low‑importance

	Paleontology portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Palaeontology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of palaeontology-related topics and create a standardized, informative, comprehensive and easy-to-use resource on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PalaeontologyWikipedia:WikiProject PalaeontologyTemplate:WikiProject PalaeontologyPalaeontology
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment

This article is or was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Hbudigan.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 18:14, 16 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Is Compsognathidae related to Avialae?

Add the reference below to this page:

Hwang, S. H., Norrell, M. A., Qiang, J., Keqin, et. G. 2004. A large compsognathid from the Early Cretaceous Yixian Formation of China. Journal of Systematic Palaeontology 2(1):13-30.

The cladistic analysis in this paper recovered Compsognathidae within Maniraptora. 72.194.116.63 15:06, 9 March 2007 (UTC) Vahe Demirjian 07.06 9 March 2007[reply]

Merge proposal

Proposal to merge/redirect Sinosauropterygidae to Compsognathidae: The traditional 'compsognathid' region of the theropod tree has been complicated by recent research suggesting that these taxa represent juvenile forms of various theropod lineages. In the recent description of two new 'compsognathid' species, the previously unused family 'Sinosauropterygidae' was revived based on the results of one analysis that found the new species, the Jehol compsognathids, and Mirischia to form a clade Compsognathus itself was not a member of. As such, Junsik1223 removed the Sinosauropterydiae redirect and expanded the page. I would argue this is premature since the results are still quite unstable and debated. 'Sinosauropterygidae' should be merged back to Compsognathidae, where this result can be best discussed in the context of that broader topic. -SlvrHwk (talk) 16:14, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Support We should only have articles on clades which are well established. This is still too tentative a hypothesis at the moment. A page can always be recreated if and when the hypothesis becomes better supported. Hemiauchenia (talk) 16:24, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Support Actually I don’t mind if you simply merge it right now really (and now that I think of it, it was premature). This was created just in case the family becomes valid in the future (and if the details are discussed in Compsognathidae article, that’s fine by me). Junsik1223 (talk) 16:26, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Support per nom A Cynical Idealist (talk) 05:49, 27 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]