Talk:Fossil trackway

Starting Talk page:

Trackways from continents

After some good discussion of trackways on different continents, a SISTER article could list and elucidate the various "[trackways of the world]".
Coastal sites are common, and being eroded away as we speak. I recall seeing on TV, or elsewhere, where SUNLIGHT angles sometimes reveal the trackways on the coastal sites, since they are always under erosion/water forces.

The land trackways also erode, but conditions are obviously different....(a SonoranDesert guyArizonaUSA)...(Not changing STUB status, but getting closer to START) (Article author)...
(I created this article because the original trackways all-(mostly) related to the "Roman Legion" tracksites of England-(especially), Europe, etc.)... --Mmcannis (talk) 05:15, 27 July 2009 (UTC)

Help me add an external link, please. https://ucmp.berkeley.edu/science/trackways/trackways4.php DrSculerati (talk) 05:07, 23 October 2019 (UTC)

Merge with Ichnite?

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section. A summary of the conclusions reached follows.

The result of this discussion was to merge Fossil trackway to Fossil track. Kent G. Budge (talk) 16:40, 20 February 2021 (UTC)

---

I just noticed we have two shortish separate articles about fossil footprints which don't even link to each other, so they seem to have been developed in parallel as content forks (their content overlaps a lot). I wonder if they should be merged (this one is basically a subtopic of ichnite). The names also seem inadequate, Jens Lallensack suggested that "fossil footprints" or "fossil tracks" would be better names. FunkMonk (talk) 07:22, 3 July 2020 (UTC)

Yes, I also think we should move Ichnite to the lemma Fossil Footprint and redirect Fossil trackway to it. --Jens Lallensack (talk) 07:27, 3 July 2020 (UTC)

I guess it would also cover tracks by organisms without limbs (and traces made by other parts of the body), so maybe "fossil track" would be more inclusive? FunkMonk (talk) 08:02, 3 July 2020 (UTC)

No, those would be termed "fossil traces", and we have the article trace fossil for them. "Fossil track" is restricted to the meaning "Fossil footprint or trackway". But maybe Fossil track is the best lemma nonetheless, because it does not make a distinction between an individual footprint and a trackway. We would also be able to use it in singular (the alternative should be "Fossil footprints" but that would be plural). This would also follow the recent recommendation made by Marty et al. 2016 ("Dinosaur track terminology: a glossary of terms"). --Jens Lallensack (talk) 08:29, 3 July 2020 (UTC)

Nice, I'm fine either way, but if you say there is some established terminology, it can't hurt to use that. Now I guess all that's left is to see if others have something to add, but the editing histories of both articles indicates they have both received very little attention since being created, with little expansion done for many years. FunkMonk (talk) 08:38, 3 July 2020 (UTC)

Late to this discussion, but seems there's consensus to consolidate Ichnite and Fossil trackway with Fossil track. Should we get on with it? I don't see a whole lot of other comments coming in. --Kent G. Budge (talk) 00:00, 9 October 2020 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.