Talk:Transitional fossil/Archive 3

This is an archive of past discussions about Transitional fossil. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

Archive 4

Missing link redux

Documention of the use of this term needs to be provided. I know its not used scientifically, so simply reporting its use in news headlines or magazine covers should suffice. And, as mentioned earlier, transitional fossil is actually the exact opposite of missing link, until such a link is found. proposed change in lede: "The phrase "missing link" has been used extensively in popular writings on human evolution, to refer to a percieved gap in the hominid evolutionary record. It is most commonly used to refer to any new transitional fossil finds, commonly describing them as "the missing link"."(mercurywoodrose)75.61.141.0 (talk) 03:50, 10 September 2011 (UTC)

Done Added and sourced the discussion in the body. Feel free to tweak the wording. Thanks.-- Obsidi♠n Soul 05:22, 10 September 2011 (UTC)

"By august command" Section

I have a preference against quotes being used for section headings. However, I've tried but I can't think of a better title to use for that section. Any suggestions? --Harizotoh9 (talk) 16:15, 9 May 2012 (UTC)

It's fine as it is. Chiswick Chap (talk) 16:38, 9 May 2012 (UTC)

The first link? Strange monster? Darwins monster? The bird from Solenhofen? Feathers and teeth? The reptile-bird? Petter Bøckman (talk) 17:46, 9 May 2012 (UTC)

I like the quote. If it's too whimsical, just "Solenhofen" might do. More explicitly: "Link between birds and reptiles" or "Bird–reptile link" (N.B. that's an ndash). No monsters please! Note that we don't begin section titles with the definite article. --Stfg (talk) 20:49, 9 May 2012 (UTC)