Category talk:Mammoth specimens
Categorization
[edit]@FunkMonk: Subfossils (which the link in your edit summary doesn't mention) are, by definition, not fossils, as they are not mineralized like fossils are. List of mammoth specimens explicitly makes the difference, having a List of notable individual fossil or subfossil mammoth remains
. Also, it's "Bold, Revert, Discuss", not "Bold, Revert, Revert, Discuss". Chaotic Enby (talk · contribs) 10:48, 19 September 2024 (UTC)
- A subfossil is a type of fossil, yes, not fully fossilised, but still considered a fossil. That is why the term is covered in the fossil article. And look up most definitions. FunkMonk (talk) 11:57, 19 September 2024 (UTC)
- Most definitions do not consider subfossils to be fossils. The term is covered in the fossil article as it is definitely a related concept, but the sources cited make it clear that they are not fossils. From the South Australian Museum:
The term subfossil refers to the skeletal remains (or other evidence such as nests) of animals that are not ancient enough to be considered true fossils but can neither be considered modern.
Chaotic Enby (talk · contribs) 12:15, 19 September 2024 (UTC)
- Most definitions do not consider subfossils to be fossils. The term is covered in the fossil article as it is definitely a related concept, but the sources cited make it clear that they are not fossils. From the South Australian Museum: