there was an article in 2000 about this particular fossil. If its the same one they found in Liaoning Province, China, it was reported by National Geographic to be a true missing link in the complex chain that connects dinosaurs to birds. Its called the Archaeoraptor liaoningensis.
That's definitely
not the same fossil. As you can see from the anatomical description, it is stated that it has a pygostyle, whereas the
Archeoraptor composite did not: its tail is from a
Microraptor.
Lots of intermediates between reptiles and modern birds have been found in China. It is sadly typical of creationism that of the many beautiful specimens to come out of China, the only one that
you could think of is one that evolutionists proved to be spurious within months of getting their hands on it. Are genuine fossils of no interest to you?
---
Archaeoraptor was a spurious fossil, produced by attaching the front half of an primitive bird (
Yanornis) to the legs of some otherwise unknown creature and the tail of a winged dinosaur (
Microraptor) too primitive to be even called a bird (i.e more primitive than
Archaeopteryx). It is therefore, in fact, a composite of
two (at least) intermediate forms, each of interest in their own right.