Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Clementechiton

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete‎. asilvering (talk) 05:08, 18 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Clementechiton

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Lack of references Zoe Aria (talk) 00:12, 11 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Organisms-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 00:41, 11 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - I guess. It's in ZooBank] (and consequently GBIF). Mark McMenamin is a well-published Professor of Geology, so no prima facie quibbles from that direction either. No one except the describer appears to have referred to it in print, ever [1], but eh :/ Article needs a couple actual sources, obviously, and that "reconstruction" needs to be junked. --Elmidae (talk · contribs) 08:01, 11 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I see this has been discussed. Delete following arguments made in discussion linked below. --Elmidae (talk · contribs) 09:25, 11 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

That is likely McMenamin’s own work (his work on these creatures are not widely supported by other researchers (there is a citation on google scholar that mentions Clementechiton). Zhenghecaris (talk) 21:52, 12 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

As noted in detail below, there are five citations, all by McMenamin, that mention "Clementechiton" if a person sifts through the "Google Scholar" results for it. Also, it lists a November 2, 2024 archive page for Draft:Clementechiton. Paul H. (talk) 01:00, 13 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. See Wikipedia:Fringe_theories/Noticeboard#Precambrian_chitons_and_another_reports_by_Mark_McMenamin, this is only supported by Mark McMenamin and not enough notable in Wikipedia, as article says. Ta-tea-two-te-to (talk) 08:04, 11 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I think Clementechiton should redirect to Mark McMenamin. Zhenghecaris (talk) 21:04, 12 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

We shouldn’t consider it valid but there is a citation by another researcher that mentions Clementechiton (search google scholar). Zhenghecaris (talk) 20:42, 13 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete following arguments made in above linked discussion. Fringe theories have no place here. IC1101-Capinatator (talk) 09:45, 11 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

How do you delete an article? Zhenghecaris (talk) 15:47, 11 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It is done by an administrator after consensus to do so has been established. --Elmidae (talk · contribs) 15:53, 11 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Can be improved by adding sources. Kolano123 (talk) 17:41, 11 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

No it can't, read the discussion linked above. --Elmidae (talk · contribs) 18:27, 11 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Yesterday, I conducted Google searches for Clementechiton sonorensis and four other genera and species of "Ediacaran" genera to find additional sources where they are mentioned. The only sources that I found Clementechiton sonorensis and the other genera are primary sources all by the same author. I also looked through the The Paleobiology Database and various parts of the Web of Science and found nothing for Clementechiton sonorensis and any of the other four genera. It appears that none of these genera are considered notable enough to either be worth using or discussed by other authors. Also, it appears unlikely that there any reliable, independent, second- and/or third-hand sources about Clementechiton to be found.

I. "Clementechiton sonorensis" and/or "Clementechiton" appear in McMenamin(2016a), McMenamin(2016b), McMenamin (2018), McMenamin (2021), and McMenamin (2023) A. "Your search found no results" - Web of Science B. " Your search produced no matches: please try again" - The Paleobiology Database

II. "Korifogrammia clementensis" and/or "Korifogrammia" appear in: McMenamin (2018), McMenamin (2021), and McMenamin (2023) A. "Your search found no results" - Web of Science B. " Your search produced no matches: please try again" - The Paleobiology Database

III, "Palankiras palmeri" and/or "Palankiras" appear in McMenamin (2018), McMenamin (2021), and McMenamin (2023) A. "Your search found no results" - Web of Science B. " Your search produced no matches: please try again" - The Paleobiology Database

IV. "Vendamonia truncata" and/or "Vendamonia" appear in McMenamin (2018) and McMenamin (2023) A. "Your search found no results" - Web of Science B. " Your search produced no matches: please try again" - The Paleobiology Database

V. "Zirabagtaria ovata" and/or "Zirabagtari" appear in McMenamin (2018) and McMenamin (2023) A. "Your search found no results" - Web of Science B. " Your search produced no matches: please try again" - The Paleobiology Database

References

McMenamin, M.A.S., 2016a. Talk 2: The Seventh Law of Morphogenetic Evolution. Session: Scientific Critique of Life Science. SOUVENIR PROGRAMME & BOOK OF ABSTRACTS | Science and Scientist – 2016.

McMenamin, M.A.S., 2016b. Dynamic Paleontology: Using Quantification and Other Tools to Decipher the History of Life. 1st. Cham: Springer International Publishing. ISBN: 978-3-319-22776-4

McMenamin, M.A.S., 2018. Deep Time Analysis: A Coherent View of the History of Life. 1st. Cham: Springer International Publishing. ISBN-13. 978-3-31974255-7

McMenamin, M.A.S., 2021. Ediacaran Biota, in: Alderton, D., Elias, S.A. (Eds.), Encyclopedia of Geology, 2nd. Academic Press, Oxford, pp. 561-575. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-409548-9 .12129-3

McMenamin, M. A. S., 2023. The cambrian explosion: macroevolution and biomineralization. Academia Biology, 1(1). https://doi.org/10.20935/AcadBiol6036 Paul H. (talk) 00:51, 12 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment I had some time on my hand and searched for additional sources for the above five genera. The results of what I found by database are 1. Academic Search Complete - nothing; 2. Biological Abstracts - nothing; 3. BioOne Digital Library - nothing ; 4. GeoRef - nothing; 5. GeoRef In Process - nothing; 6. GeoScienceWorld - nothing; 7. Google Scholar - no additional citations; and 8. ProQuest Dissertations & Theses A&I - nothing. Paul H. (talk) 00:56, 12 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I found another source mentioning Clementechiton on google scholar by another researcher,and Clementechiton may have been mentioned in a paper as a Proterozoic chiton (as in Mark McMenamin [before my edits]). Zhenghecaris (talk) 20:45, 13 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

If you think that you have found an usable source or sources , you need to post a specific citation and, if available, link to it or them, so other editors can evaulate it. Otherwise, we have no way of judging the significance of what you have found. Paul H. (talk) 01:13, 15 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - no reliable sources. Doug Weller talk 09:08, 15 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to Mark McMenamin Though even the original author wants it deleted:

I think it should be deleted but I don’t know how to do that. Zhenghecaris (talk) 15:57, 11 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

(Copied from his reply to the AfD notice on his talk page). Several other contentious genera have been similarly redirected. Delete the draft, and maybe salt it ? Big Blue Cray(fish) Twins (talk) 11:22, 17 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect/Merge to Mark McMenamin per WP:ATD.4meter4 (talk) 17:36, 17 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.