Geologist Sir Richard Owen, Curator of the British Museum of Natural Hisory, gave Archaeopteryx it's name in 1863 four years after it was discovered near the Bavarian town Papperheim in the Solnhofen Limestone. This actually was the second specimen found. The first being in 1855, but was believed to be a pterodactyl by paleontologist von Meyer. Three other skeletons were found plus a feather in 1861, 1877, 1951 and 1956. The accepted interpretation of Archaeopteryx is a feathered creature, crow-sized with a long tail that was composed of bone, muscle and ligaments. The wrists ended with long reptillian claws and it had a scaled snout with teeth. All of these features represent reptillian origins while on the other hand Archaeopteryx had feathers, wings, a wishing bone and a perching foot which resembles birds. It's discovery promoted many debates among scientists (John H. Ostrom ),creationists and skeptics. here are just a few of the articles that have been published on the subject:
British Journal of Potography (vol.132, March 1985)
Sir Fred Hoyle, a fanous British astronomer, claims that after examining the fossil at the British Museum the impressions of feathers in the stone slab were faked with cement matrix and chicken feathers.
Science (vol.232, 2 May 1986,pp. 622-625)
The team of Charig, Greenaway, Milner, Walker and Whybrow title their article Archaeopteryx is not a forgery. With technical and detailed arguments, they state thta there is absolutely no evidence of 'doctoring' of the specimen. They also point out that there are a remaining 5 specimens discovered at different times and places 'under well documented conditions'.
Zoological Journal of the Linnen Society (vol.82, 1984, pp. 119-158)
R.A. Thulborn
states that 'after careful morphological analysis of bids, dinosaurs, reptiles
and Archaeopteryx, it is no more closely related to birds than therapod dinosaurs
including tyrannosaurids and orthinomimids'. He believes that there is no
'missing-link' between dinosaurs and birds at all, but that birds 'may have
arisen by a sudden abrupt evolutionary change' rather than a gradual one
as proposed by Darwin.
Paleobiology (vol.12, pp.383-389)
Joel Cracraft, using techniques of 'numerical taxonomy', says that Archaeopteryx is indeed a 'sister group for all remaining birds'.
Of course there is still many articles and debates about Archaeopteryx out there and probably will be more to come for some time.