This article is rated List-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||
|
North Carolina and South Carolina now have state fossils. Can this page get updated? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.159.210.82 ( talk) 22:01, 16 June 2015 (UTC)
This list is
incomplete; you can help by
adding missing items. |
Rather than delete this partial list, I moved it here for discussion. The External link covers this list completely. Why don't we employ our energies in improving the Wikipedia entries for state fossils first? When we have entries for all the state fossils, then we might create a list of them. Wetman 15:14, 15 May 2004 (UTC)
Removed "a precursor to the earliest fishes". Eurypterids are not vertebrates. Dlloyd 08:02, 15 Aug 2004 (UTC)
You don't find it even a tiny tiny bit odd that US States seem to think it a good idea to have a State Fossil? What about a State Bacterium? A State constellation? Humans are such odd things. -- Tagishsimon
Having a State Fossil promotes tourism and visits from amateur paleontologists. Don't knock it. Take a gander at the bizarre Tully Monster, Illinois' State Fossil. Speciate 02:02, 12 May 2007 (UTC)
User:Cburnett gives good format! -- Wetman 12:06, 6 Dec 2004 (UTC)
I propose this merger because the overlap is obvious, and the other list is pretty sparse. There's no big deal if there are double listings because that can be simply handled as they have been at other lists of state emblems. I also think that this page needs to be moved to *List of U.S. state fossils* to match up with the other U.S. state emblem lists. — Elipongo ( Talk| contribs) 23:51, 18 March 2007 (UTC)
I merged the two lists; they strongly overlapped, people were putting hoax entries into the dinosaur list, and finally there was the clear yet anti-intuitive instruction to only include "state dinosaurs" in the other list, not "dinosaurs that are also state fossils", which was technically correct but would leave out several dinosaurs that were state fossils but not state dinosaurs, and which was selectively ignored. If someone disagrees, go ahead and revert back; you'll at least have a revision of a merged version if you want it later. J. Spencer 22:05, 3 September 2007 (UTC)
Could someone please put Calymene celebra in the wisconsin section. I tried, but unfortunatly I am not a member. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 66.222.30.24 ( talk) 14:12, August 20, 2007 (UTC)
Minnesota's is missing as well http://www.leg.state.mn.us/leg/unsym.aspx — Preceding unsigned comment added by 134.29.94.47 ( talk) 17:06, 31 March 2014 (UTC)
State fossil →
List of U.S. state fossils — To conform with other lists of state emblems —
Elipongo (
Talk|
contribs) 22:14, 4 May 2007 (UTC)
This article has been renamed from state fossil to List of U.S. state fossils as the result of a move request. -- Stemonitis 08:04, 10 May 2007 (UTC)
I removed all of the old section:
The Georgia shark's tooth and the two dino-track examples may be worth mention when the meaning of "a little generic" (do they designate all fossilized sharks' teeth found in the state? a specific tooth? three specific teeth of two species?) and "sets of dinosaur footprints" (all those that ever may be found in CT's Dinosaur State Park, perhaps?) in CT and MA become known to us. (And similarly for the Florida agatized coral, not mentioned above.) But virtually all of the removed text is unencyclopedic fluff, rising to a peak with the rd-lk to "gone out on a limb" -- where the omission of the wink-emoticon is hard to understand.
A list does not necessarily need a text introduction longer than a defining sentence. I've included the new lead for a stub, more with the thot that it's worth reviving State fossil as an article (roughly my new lead, as the intial stub) that discusses, e.g.
BTW, i've left out mentioning that the list already is not restricted to the 50 states; DC is in there, and tho i don't know the term to invoke -- probably not "state substitutes" -- we should include PR, USVI and the 3 or so non-state entities in the Pacific that are being used to extend the state-quarters series.
--
Jerzy•
t 03:32, 1 January 2008 (UTC)
I propose that, in tandem, we
-- rename to
List of fossils as U.S. state insignia (or insignias, which is completely acceptable in modern English and eliminates the amibiguity: this is not about cases where a fossil is the (principal) insignia -- or, in proper Latin, insigne -- of the state),
and
-- modify the table, which is already dealing with including state dinos and stones (but in a haphazard fashion), perhaps thus:
are current columns. I would
Note that for Colorado, where the Stego does double duty (or so WP says), Y and dino both apply; in cases that have different dino and fossil, two sub-rows within the state's row are needed.
Finally, in the table, i've removed the word "undetermined" from the GA, KY, LA, MA, and WV rows. If it means "WP doesn't know", it should be a blank waiting to be filled, not an implicit self-ref. If it means
then language distinguishing those must be worked out to replace the ambiguous term "undetermined". (If no one comes forward saying "i filled those cells, and i meant X", i suppose i'll dig thru the history to identify the editor(s) responsible, in hopes of asking them.)
Altho it's another question, i think the dino and mineral/rock/stone/gemstone lists can continue to function as they already do -- or something similar to what i propose above may be desirable for them, to cover cases where there's a fossil that is a stone or dinosaur, but nothing explicitly designated as stone or dinosaur.
--
Jerzy•
t 03:32, 1 January 2008 (UTC)
Minnesota is blue on the map but does not have an entry. I'm confused! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.41.5.42 ( talk) 19:56, 13 March 2011 (UTC)
From a quick search, it looks like Minnesota has no official state fossil, though legislation declaring one has been introduced but not signed. I imagine that was the source of confusion for whomever made the map. The giant beaver seems to be the lead contender; I wish they would make it official. Walkersam ( talk) 03:55, 7 January 2012 (UTC)
The picture shows a Palmoxylon from Dresden (Germany).-- Einheit3 ( talk) 21:39, 19 June 2011 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on List of U.S. state fossils. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 18 January 2022).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 20:20, 19 May 2017 (UTC)
Can someone change the map to show that Texas doesn't have a state fossil? It has a state dino, which was in the table, but I removed it since it's not officially the state fossil as well. — Ayuskoto ( talk) 07:44, 17 July 2020 (UTC)
Map needs to change Indiana to blue as it added one on February this year as the chart states. Sorry but I was reluctant to mess that file up. The Master Guns ( talk) 22:07, 16 September 2022 (UTC)