Talk:Tetrapodophis

	Tetrapodophis is part of WikiProject Amphibians and Reptiles, an effort to make Wikipedia a standardized, informative, comprehensive and easy-to-use resource for amphibians and reptiles. If you would like to participate, you can choose to edit this article, or visit the project page for more information.Amphibians and ReptilesWikipedia:WikiProject Amphibians and ReptilesTemplate:WikiProject Amphibians and Reptilesamphibian and reptile articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
	It is requested that an a range map be included in this article to improve its quality.

Palaeontology Mid‑importance

	Paleontology portal 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
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Fossil controversy[edit]

Recently, there is the news that Tetrapodophis fossils were donated to a museum in Brazil.[1] I remembered that Tetrapodophis was in trouble over allegations that its fossils were illegally exported from Brazil. I was sure that this page also had written about controversy of fossil, so I tried to add that information to the article. But what I noticed is that section is completely removed from the page. After seeing page history, I noticed that whole section is removed in this revision,[2] claiming "false accusations which are unrelated to the science". The user who did that edit, User:Pterogirl (contributions), seems to be account of Megan Jacobs, who worked on press-art of Leptostomia, which is described by David M. Martill and Nicholas R. Longrich, who are describer of Tetrapodophis. So I guess she probably deleted this content to defend her suspicions about their study. However, this issue has been extensively discussed in 2021 paper discussed about Tetrapodophis affinity.[3] Should content related to controversy be retained on this page? P.S. User:Yewtharaptor readded about this content. Ta-tea-two-te-to (talk) 13:30, 8 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The removal was clearly inappropriate. The controversy was the subject of newspaper coverage and therefore is due for inclusion. Pterogirl/Jacobs (see the Commons image [4]) has a blatant WP:Conflict of Interest as a PhD student at Portsmouth were Martill is employed, and they shouldn't make any edits related to Dave Martill. Full dlsclosure: I was the one who originally added much of the controversy stuff to the article, and I met Martill at the University of Portsmouth once around a decade ago. I have no ill will towards anyone involved in this issue. Hemiauchenia (talk) 18:58, 8 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]