Archaeopteryx is part of WikiProject Birds, an attempt at creating a standardized, informative and easy-to-use ornithological resource. If you would like to participate, visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks. Please do not substitute this template.BirdsWikipedia:WikiProject BirdsTemplate:WikiProject Birdsbird articles
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 articles
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 articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Teylers, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Teylers Museum 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.TeylersWikipedia:WikiProject TeylersTemplate:WikiProject TeylersTeylers articles
This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
This article is written in British English, which has its own spelling conventions (colour, travelled, centre, defence, artefact, analyse) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus.
I thought it could be worth mentioning that the studies by Wang et al. (2018)[1] and Hartman et al. (2019)[2] concluded Archaeopteryx was closer to Dromaeosauridae and Troodontidae than to Neornithes. Mortimer's "Theropod Database" agrees with Hartman's proposed phylogeny on multiple aspects, including Archaeopteryx's position.[3]Kiwi Rex (talk) 01:42, 1 December 2019 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I really don't have the expertise to write that up, but I suppose it could start off by elaborating the main hypotheses (Archaeopteryx is closer to birds than other dinosaurs, Archaeopteryx is closer to other dinosaurs than to birds [e.g. the Lori paper], and of course maniraptorans are not in actuality coelurosaurs, then elaborate each hypothesis, and then go into the question of multiple origins of flight or multiple losses. 138.88.18.245 (talk) 23:16, 6 July 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Some IP replaced ‘bird-like dinosaur’ the short description with ‘bird with saurian features’ Cheers Markbassett (talk) 22:43, 13 January 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Archaios in Greek means ‘original’ or ‘from the beginning’; arche being the beginning/origin. It is nothing literally to do with ancient, that’s just a deduction. It is the winged creature that was there first. The ‘original-winged’ if you will. 2A01:C22:B8C8:2F00:FDF1:55C:EE00:A394 (talk) 07:32, 8 July 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
It seems all of the -ise/-ize words in this article are spelt -ize, since this isn't usually normal British spelling (except oxford spelling) should all of these be changed to -ise or left as -ize? If left as -ize I think there should be a tag saying to use Oxford spelling instead of British english to be clearer. Ertoe (talk) 04:34, 4 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Ize is consistent with UK English (Oxford is within the sphere of UK English), both versions can be used. Of course, if "ize" is the version used, it is just important that it's internally consistent, which it seems to be. But I see both "colour" and "color", "center" instead of "centre", etc. FunkMonk (talk) 10:21, 4 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
