A fact from Tongtianlong appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know column on 1 December 2016 (check views). The text of the entry was as follows:
Did you know... that the first known specimen of the dinosaurTongtianlong limosus, which may have died trapped in mud, was nearly blown up by Chinese workmen?
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Dinosaurs, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of dinosaurs and dinosaur-related topics 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.DinosaursWikipedia:WikiProject DinosaursTemplate:WikiProject Dinosaursdinosaurs articles
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
Earlier, an (erroneous) Chinese transliteration of Tongtianlong was added to the page. I have corrected it based on this press release from the Chinese Academy of Sciences. Could this be considered a reliable source for the correct transliteration? Should we include a transliteration at all (see Mei long) or not (see Aorun and Banji)? Lythronaxargestes (talk) 05:17, 12 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Sure, that source is fine. :) Sorry about my earlier mistaken translation; I saw the text in the article about "tongtianlong" and "road to heaven dragon" and immediately translated it as 同天龙/同天龍 without thinking of the other possibility of the homophonic 通天龙/通天龍, which is another set of characters that could translate to "road to heaven dragon" and would also be transliterated as "tongtianlong".
As for whether to include the transcription at all, certainly we should. It is standard on Wikipedia to add a note on the original language transcriptions when the English term is just a direct transliteration of the original language term, not just for Chinese, but for other languages; that's the purpose of the multilingual support templates. The original language transcriptions are also additional useful information on the history of the subject.
Duly noted, thank you! I'll add the source for the transliteration. Lythronaxargestes (talk) 06:54, 12 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Images
Considering that the description is a Scientific Reports paper, might it be possible to use some of the images from the paper in the article? Lythronaxargestes (talk) 05:54, 27 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Ah, nice, I didn't know it was a CC paper! Yeah, for that vertical image, I'd probably change it in Photoshop so the photos are side by side, and the image becomes horizontal, that works better on Wikipedia, but otherwise looks good to me. FunkMonk (talk) 13:32, 18 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Cool, images in journal images are often extremely long vertically, because they are "standalone", whereas in Wikipedia they have to be wrapped around by text. So it can sometimes be hard to fit them here... FunkMonk (talk) 09:12, 19 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
