Talk:John William Salter
Appearance
![]() | This article is rated Stub-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Excessive article detail
[edit]Unless there is significant objection, I propose that the taxa sections be either heavily trimmed of the details that are not relevant to John William Salter (type locality, synonym and homonym names, detailed history of citations), or deleted fully.--Kevmin § 21:16, 17 March 2021 (UTC)
- Support. There is far too much intricate and excessive detail throughout; even professional taxonomists would not expect to find this much detail in an encyclopedia article. In fact, the entire bloated "Fossils named in honour of John William Salter" section should be drastically cut and/or transferred to Wikispecies. These rather trivial aspects are granted far too much weight per WP:PROPORTION, WP:DUEWEIGHT (and good taste).--Animalparty! (talk) 23:53, 17 March 2021 (UTC)
Addendum: Another page where this issue was raised was Henry Hicks (geologist), with an attempt at discussion started at talk:Henry Hicks (geologist), however @Micktherocktapper: did not engage in dialog there, while additions to Gryphaea arcuata have been revdeved as copyright violations.--Kevmin § 03:34, 18 March 2021 (UTC)
Categories:
- Stub-Class biography articles
- Stub-Class biography (science and academia) articles
- Unknown-importance biography (science and academia) articles
- Science and academia work group articles
- Automatically assessed biography articles
- WikiProject Biography articles
- Stub-Class Palaeontology articles
- Low-importance Palaeontology articles
- Stub-Class Palaeontology articles of Low-importance
- Paleontologist taskforce articles
- WikiProject Palaeontology articles