Talk:Paleontology in Finland

Did you know nomination

(

• Comment or view
• Article history

)

• ... that fossils have Finland?

• Source: https://www.google.ru/books/edition/Precambrian_Geology_of_Finland/3D5R3vexH1sC?hl=en&gbpv=1

https://www.jstor.org/stable/4522937?searchText=finland&searchUri=%2Faction%2FdoBasicSearch%3FQuery%3Dfinland%26so%3Drel%26efqs%3DeyJkaXNjIjpbImNHRnNaVzl1ZEc5c2IyZDVMV1JwYzJOcGNHeHBibVU9Il19&ab_segments=0%2Fbasic_search_gsv2%2Fcontrol&refreqid=fastly-default%3A2c878dedc2455159322a47ff806482bf

• • Reviewed: Template:Did you know nominations/Fossils of Finland
  • Comment: hello!

Created by DogWorldLive64 (talk). Number of QPQs required: 0. Nominator has fewer than 5 past nominations.

DogWorldLive64 (talk) 10:16, 1 January 2025 (UTC).

• Hello and welcome to DYK. Right now, Fossils of Finland is only 235 characters long, far below the 1,500 character minimum requirement. The article's wording is also in need of a copyedit. As this appears to be your first nomination and English doesn't seem to be your first language, we can be lenient and give the article a week to be brought up to standards. If you need any assistance, please do not hesitate to ask for advice over at WT:DYK. Good luck! Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 11:12, 1 January 2025 (UTC)

It has been almost a week since the nomination, but the article has not made any edits to the article, nor did they properly respond to the above. As the article is nowhere near a state appropriate for DYK and also now has a notability tag, this nomination is marked for closure. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 14:24, 7 January 2025 (UTC)

@GeorgiaHuman: has beefed this up to 899 characters. Would you be interested in expanding further?--Launchballer 11:56, 9 January 2025 (UTC)

@Launchballer: I see that you proposed the article for deletion (which DogWorldLive64 then removed). Maybe an AFD is needed to address the notability concerns? Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 12:50, 9 January 2025 (UTC)

It seems to me that the DogWorldLive64 profile (used to create/nominate this title) has primarily been used for disruptive editing. And, while "the creator also engaged in vandalism" is not strictly one of the WP:DYKRULES, three of the five WP:DYKAIMs are to: 'showcase' new/improved/quality content, to 'acknowledge' the work of the creating editor, and to 'encourage' such behaviours and recruit others to do the same. Personally I don't think DYK nom is one that deserves/warrants 'showcasing' or the related behaviours should be 'acknowledged' or 'encouraged'. Whatever about an AfD, I think this DYK should be closed/rejected. As an extension of WP:DENY. Guliolopez (talk) 15:16, 14 January 2025 (UTC)

Which would be a good point, however this was started off by that user as a 200-odd character stub and would now be eligible as a 5x expansion by a different user. (It's currently just over 1,400; might finish the job when I'm feeling less spaced out.)--Launchballer 15:29, 14 January 2025 (UTC)

Fossils of Finland versus Fossils in Finland

This article does not make enough of a distinction between "Fossils of Finland" (fossils found in Finland) and "Fossils in Finland" (fossils found in other countries that are now stored in Finland). The museum in Tampere museum has some dinosaur eggs in its collection but they are not relevant to the geology of Finland. Likewise, the vertebrate fossils from Ukraine are not fossils of Finland. I suggest that mention of foreign fossils should be removed from this article (this is my preference). Alternatively, the article could be renamed to "Paleontology in Finland" which can cover both fossils found in Finland and fossils found in other countries but stored in Finland. GeoWriter (talk) 14:56, 10 January 2025 (UTC)

Ice age cleared away most of the sediments containing fossils so there are very few fossils to be found in Finland. A broader topic "Paleontology in Finland" would then be more likely to grow into an article with enough content to be interesting. This could also include discussion about Finnish paleontologists. Here's one source: https://www.jstor.org/stable/23737185 Jähmefyysikko (talk) 09:00, 11 January 2025 (UTC)

Here's a paper about a fossil probably of Deinotherium from southern Finland [1] Hemiauchenia (talk) 13:13, 12 January 2025 (UTC)

Requested move 12 January 2025

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: moved. Consensus that this is a better scope and is WP:CONSISTENT. (closed by non-admin page mover) Cremastra (talk) 17:09, 19 January 2025 (UTC)

---

Fossils of Finland → Paleontology in Finland – Finland doesn't have that many fossils due to glacial erosion, so It makes more sense to talk about paleontology in Finland generally, rather than just fossils. Hemiauchenia (talk) 16:19, 12 January 2025 (UTC)

• Support move. "Paleontology in Finland" is a broader topic, and can cover the related institutions, politics etc. as well, not just the fossils themselves. It is also consistent with other similar articles, as we have numerous "Paleontology in country" articles already, e.g. Paleontology in South Dakota, Paleontology in Lebanon, etc. --Jens Lallensack (talk) 14:15, 13 January 2025 (UTC)

Support move per nomination. Ta-tea-two-te-to (talk) 15:59, 13 January 2025 (UTC)

• Support move per nomination. GeoWriter (talk) 20:07, 16 January 2025 (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.