This article is within the scope of WikiProject Turtles, a project which is currently considered to be inactive.TurtlesWikipedia:WikiProject TurtlesTemplate:WikiProject TurtlesTurtles articles
Pig-nosed turtle is within the scope of WikiProject Australia, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of Australia and Australia-related topics. If you would like to participate, visit the project page.AustraliaWikipedia:WikiProject AustraliaTemplate:WikiProject AustraliaAustralia articles
This article has been given a rating which conflicts with the project-independent quality rating in the banner shell. Please resolve this conflict if possible.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Indonesia, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Indonesia and Indonesia-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.IndonesiaWikipedia:WikiProject IndonesiaTemplate:WikiProject IndonesiaIndonesia articles
Latest comment: 12 years ago3 comments2 people in discussion
Was wondering why Chelodina insculpta was added as a synonym here. That is a fossil species described by de Vis (1893). It is a valid species and correctly assigned to the Chelodina. Cheers, Faendalimastalk16:33, 30 May 2012 (UTC)Reply
The full line in Fritz 2007 reads "1997 Chelodina insculpta– Cann (non †Chelodina insculptade Vis, 1897), Monitor (J. Vict. Herpetol. Soc.), 9 (1): 34." Regards, SunCreator(talk)18:51, 30 May 2012 (UTC)Reply
Hmmm... this makes no sense, I dont remember this and do not have Cann 97 on me to check. But if he named a species Chelodina insculpta then it is a junior homonym of Chelodina insculpta de Vis, 1897. Unless someone has moved it to Carettochelys, whereby it would be a junior homonym of that species. I would imagine this is an error of some kind. Cheers, Faendalimastalk20:46, 30 May 2012 (UTC)Reply
Latest comment: 7 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
This species interests me. Is it the most basal (ie primitive) of the extant reptilia? Wikipedia gives me that impression, but doesn't come out and say so.24.108.58.49 (talk) 18:49, 1 January 2017 (UTC)Reply