User talk:J. Spencer/Archive 3
Paleorrota
I know is dificult found informations about this. Thank you, one more time.Sergio Kaminski (talk) 01:02, 15 January 2009 (UTC) Cinodonte Rio Grande do sul
Please check the Box (age of dinossaus) in paleorrota page. Thank you.Sergio Kaminski (talk) 20:42, 29 August 2009 (UTC)
I would like to look my English ist correct. Good to see the four videos that are on the pages. This very good special effects. Thank you.Sergio Kaminski (talk) 14:45, 30 August 2009 (UTC)
Spencer. Thanks you. Sergio Kaminski (talk) 16:03, 31 August 2009 (UTC)
Allosaurus
Tyrannosauridae
- I just wanted to make sure that it is ok to go ahead with teh article for a GAN and that the main contributors are ok with this. Nergaal (talk) 03:20, 11 September 2008 (UTC)]
- Just a quick question: why didn't you guys submit the Nergaal (talk) 00:44, 15 September 2008 (UTC)]
- I read the discussion and dobody specifies anything against nominating it. The only possible concern that might not be solvable during a GAN is the comprehensibility - in my opinion it looks good. Otherwise, the style issues can be solved. Again, to me it looks good. But I guess it is up to you if you want to nominate it. Nergaal (talk) 02:04, 15 September 2008 (UTC)]
- Actually better: the worst thing that could normally happen is to fail with some clear comments, and then with those comments someone can update the article and resubmit it for GAN. Nergaal (talk) 03:57, 11 November 2008 (UTC)]
Thanks a lot!
Congrats, J
- Thanks! J. Spencer (talk) 02:37, 28 September 2008 (UTC)
- Dude, I totally saw that article the other day. Was that you that was quoted in the article, J. Spence? Abyssal (talk) 04:36, 28 September 2008 (UTC)
- 'Tis (this is a nom de wiki ;) ). J. Spencer (talk) 14:50, 28 September 2008 (UTC)
- I had no idea you were involved in such awesomeness. I envy the hell out of you.Abyssal (talk) 15:48, 28 September 2008 (UTC)
- Thank you! I'm a bit surprised we haven't had IPs adding stuff from the press releases or documentary yet. J. Spencer (talk) 21:27, 28 September 2008 (UTC)
- Well, Leonardo isn't a "terrifying meat-eater related to T. rex", so don't hold your breath. I guess I could log in as an IP and randomly add some stuff in, if it makes you feel any better... ;) Firsfron of Ronchester 22:43, 28 September 2008 (UTC)
- Nah, it's no biggie. Eventually we got the lost and found Royal Ontario Barosaurus story, so this one should creep in at some point. The exhibit opening in Houston was pushed back a week because of Hurricane Ike, too. J. Spencer (talk) 22:51, 28 September 2008 (UTC)
Notice
{{{1}}}
Cite journal template changes
GA of Cultural depictions of dinosaurs
Albertonykus
Irano-Afgan
Hello, Cyrus111;
I'm sorry, but I'm not familiar enough with the topic to comment on sources. I just periodically disambiguate the term morphology, and Irano-Afghan came up in one of my earlier sweeps. I have fixed another wikilink for the article, though. If a source is authoritative, it should be used, although for basic information I would probably stick to the early 20th century anthropologists instead of modern websites. J. Spencer (talk) 16:22, 9 November 2008 (UTC)
Hi, well 2 sources are from coon the other from shool of Athens both from 20th century, so keep them??? I like how it unifies people and creates affinity and learns about history the problem is the texts that are put in the one from school of Athens where it has been modified, and also there is the text from Mr. Gregor. I should probably get more opinions on this matter so to reach a consensus Cyrus111 (talk) 16:59, 11 November 2008 (UTC)
Dinosaur Park Formation
My picsHey J. Spenser on the Abelisaurus page I put those pictures up. I am wondering if there are Dinosaurs that have had most of their body discovered can I make a size comparison? Nrg800 (talk)
Thanks that makes more sense. But is that diagram that I did for the fossil finds okay?
Nrg800 (talk) 06:33, 21 November 2008 (UTC)
Thank you alot for that Commons link I better get to work making a new one XD Nrg800 (talk) 07:30, 26 November 2008 (UTC)
Thanks
Azhdarch cat
Desert extinctness
Perfect!! Keep up the great work The Bald One White cat 18:45, 14 December 2008 (UTC)
Talk: List of dinosaurs
Stego distro
DYK for Peloroplites
On 24 December, 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Peloroplites, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.
BorgQueen (talk) 07:37, 24 December 2008 (UTC)
WP:DABS and 718 Bot
- Done! talk) 16:07, 17 January 2009 (UTC)]
Argentinosaurus
Pterosaurs format
- Great! :) Abyssal (talk) 00:15, 21 January 2009 (UTC)
- I tweaked the Q-Z section again so that it should look better on bigger monitors and/or higher resolutions. I haven't had a chance to look at it on my home monitor (at school now), so I thought I'd try to get some extra eyes on this until I can. Does it look any different/better/worse? Abyssal (talk) 16:08, 21 January 2009 (UTC)
- Thanks! That's what it should look like; it's what I see too. However, on the really large monitor's at my uni it actually looks wider, whereas the previous version left a big ugly gap. It looks a smidgen worse today on my monitor (and yours apparently) but it looks a heapload better that way on the monitors at school, and since people at schools form a large block of our viewers I think the tradeoff is justifiable. :) Abyssal (talk) 04:24, 22 January 2009 (UTC)
To J. Spencer
You edited what I said about Pterodactyls. While everything about them eating human babies was crap, Pterodactyl Awareness Month does exist. I have seen T-Shirts and calenders. Please revert the article. -Sabotage2595
Edmontosaurus
DYK for Akanthosuchus
On February 14, 2009, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Akanthosuchus, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.
--Dravecky (talk) 04:22, 14 February 2009 (UTC)
Birds and dinosaurs
- Yeah, every so often some well-intentioned type comes along and removes "non-avian" from a dinosaur article. It beats the incredible expanding theropods and the cartoon cameo edits. J. Spencer (talk) 23:35, 25 February 2009 (UTC)
Barnstar
The Original Barnstar
For all-around good work, I award J. Spencer this Barnstar. Keep it up!--ragesoss (talk) 00:22, 26 February 2009 (UTC)
No lapsus calami in poposauridae?
Thanks
Dibothrosuchus
- Done! talk) 19:49, 7 March 2009 (UTC)
DYK for Miragaia (dinosaur)
On Miragaia (dinosaur), which you recently nominated. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.
Royalbroil 02:11, 6 March 2009 (UTC)
Edmontosaurus
DYK for Phyllodontosuchus
On March 9, 2009, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Phyllodontosuchus, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.
Shubinator (talk) 00:23, 9 March 2009 (UTC)
DYK for Dibothrosuchus
On March 12, 2009, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Dibothrosuchus, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.
Congratulations! PeterSymonds (talk) 22:13, 12 March 2009 (UTC)
Edmontosaurus
The entire article needs its prose reviewed; I merely listed items from the lead for starters. Regarding the use of animal: it's good to state the obvious, it's an easy-to-grasp non-jargon-y word, and it saves you from having to say the animal's name or "it" a lot. 05:01, 17 March 2009 (UTC)
DYK
Argentinosaurus againHello, I search for help about Argentinosaurus again. It seems that there are three papers about Argentinosaurus in 90s, such as:
- Appenzeller, T. 1994. Argentine dinos vie for heavyweight titles. Science 266, 1805.
- Paul, G.S. 1994. Is Garden Park home to the world’s largest known land animal? Garden Park Paleontology Society 4, 5.
- Paul, G.S. 1997. Dinosaur models: the good, the bad, and using them to estimate the mass of dinosaurs. In Wolberg, D.L., Stump, E. and Rosenberg, G.D. (eds), DinoFest International Proceedings, pp
But i can't find these papers in internet. Can you search these papers, and find out the length and weight of Argentinosaurus in these papers?
I'll be very thankful if you can help me, thanks. hoseumou 08:40, 28 March 2009 (UTC)
- Thanks you for your answer. But i have a question, it seems that [Early reconstructions estimated...] directly comes from Dinosaur Mailing List. Is that techniquely enough to be a reference? Finally, I have to say I very admired your dinosaur article, such as Edmontosaurus. :) hoseumou 07:43, 31 March 2009 (UTC)
QuinceratopsHi, Firs;
You'd better nail the article, too. J. Spencer (talk) 18:02, 24 May 2009 (UTC)
- Thanks J. The article was still redlinked when I removed it from Ceratopsidae. I'm not sure what to do about the image on Commons, File:Quinceratops 03869.JPG. Probably someone should be notified. Firsfron of Ronchester 18:15, 24 May 2009 (UTC)
- Moab man can probably be salvaged, given time (and a little TNT). Firsfron of Ronchester 19:33, 24 May 2009 (UTC)]
Piveteausaurus
RajasaurusHi! Spencer,
The following are quoated from Rjanag's talk page.
May I request you to please revisit the above article to review the tag, since another expert on the subject has edited it?--Nvvchar (talk) 09:46, 16 May 2009 (UTC)
- Hey Nvvchar, sorry it's taken me so long to get back. Anyway, it would probably be better to ask J. Spencer about this, since he's the one who did the rewriting and he's more familiar with the content. I'm sure that if he went through it it's probably all fine now, but I'd feel more comfortable letting him remove the tag (since he knows what the state of the article is, whereas all I can do right now is assume—and I'd rather not go through one sentence at a time, as JSpencer probably already has). rʨanaɢ talk/contribs 21:18, 30 May 2009 (UTC)
Since, as a well known expert in the field, you have edited the version of Rajasaurus after Rjanag,s tag, which was earlier also edited by a group of users of the
Dinosaurs Portal with extensive experience in this field, would you kindly consider removing the tag on the article? I am in the process of getting some pictures of Rajasuarus model erected in Lucknow India posted on the article. Thanks--Nvvchar (talk) 02:58, 31 May 2009 (UTC)]
- Thank you very much. I hope I will have opportunities in the near future on the ]
- Can you nominate this article for GA status since it is already assessed as "B" class and many of
Dinosaurs portal members like yourself and others have put in a lot of effort to improve it?--Nvvchar (talk) 15:37, 1 August 2009 (UTC)]
Heterodontosauridae
- I highly doubt that somebody would consider it OR, but it's better to be safe than sorry. Thanks for contacting the other editor, and hopefully a source can be found for it. --Happy editing! Nehrams2020 (talk • contrib) 05:04, 2 June 2009 (UTC)
Piveteau's brain probably was bigger than a walnut
- I think it's great. I think he was a scientific illustrator also; although many scientists at the time did their own illustrations, he was known for his. I tried to confirm this information to include in the article but found nothing specific. The illustrations can be included in both the dinosaur and bio articles, if you can get decent copies. If you don't get decent copies, and I have time, I can resketch at least the most important one of them if they're out of copyright. --69.226.103.13 (talk) 22:56, 2 June 2009 (UTC)
User 173.35.129.119 issues....I just undid a half dozen bad edits of his...again. He just got the temporary ban lifted and is right back at it..
it's gotten to where someone needs to get a perma ban put on that IP address. It's vandalism at this point. I don't know if you have that ability or can get in contact with someone who does, but it's really time. Forescore68 (talk) 16:15, 13 June 2009 (UTC)
- Oh, and thanks for cleaning up my Chuandongocoelurus mess...I did it in a huffy. Glad I don't lose points in this forum for being hasty and dumb...Forescore68 (talk) 02:33, 18 June 2009 (UTC)
Italictitle templateHi, Firs;
I just found out something useful about the italictitle template: I already knew that if it is put at the top, it prevents the uppermost [edit] bracket from showing. However, if it's put below the taxobox, as Bob did at Pteranodon and I just did with Allosaurus, it doesn't interfere. I don't know if this has editing drawbacks, but it's very good to know we can get back the edit bracket for the lede section, especially for ginormous articles. J. Spencer (talk) 01:35, 17 June 2009 (UTC)
- Hey!
- I didn't realize it prevents the uppermost edit link from showing. We might want to bring this up at tree of life. Either this should be fixed through the template itself, or I could possibly AWB it; I think there is a pretty easy way to delete the template name while substituting the same template name immediately below the taxobox. If this is acceptable to you (and everyone else who works in these areas), I could work on this tomorrow. Thanks for catching this. Firsfron of Ronchester 06:17, 17 June 2009 (UTC).
- P.S. Also, I'd like to make sure I interpreted everything I've included in the article correctly. Thanks in advance! Mess around with the guy in shades all you like - don't mess around with the girl in gloves! (talk) 08:28, 26 June 2009 (UTC)
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template. Mess around with the guy in shades all you like - don't mess around with the girl in gloves! (talk) 00:41, 27 June 2009 (UTC)
- I reveiewed the DYK hook for this, and everything looks fine except that I had some minor wording changes to the hook. If you are okay with those changes, please indicate so in its DYK submission at Template talk:Did You Know#Gallardosaurus and I can approve the hook. Rlendog (talk) 02:17, 8 July 2009 (UTC)]
New hoaxHi, Firs;
Here's a new one to nail, if it's still here by the time you read this: Rorasaurus. J. Spencer (talk) 13:19, 1 July 2009 (UTC)
(I'd watch Roarasaurus too, as they may try to recreate it.) J. Spencer (talk) 13:27, 1 July 2009 (UTC)
- Thanks. I've just nuked it. Firsfron of Ronchester 13:53, 1 July 2009 (UTC)
- Yeah, I'm going to start re-inquiring about the possibility of fixing WP:DABS. As you say, if some random IP hadn't added the name to the List, you wouldn't have noticed it. That's not good. Firsfron of Ronchester 00:47, 2 July 2009 (UTC)
- It's true: DABS was just one way of catching potential hoaxes (or very short new articles that editors sometimes create), but it was nice to have that option. Firsfron of Ronchester 04:32, 2 July 2009 (UTC)
- I had no idea it would be that easy. Request, and within an hour, voila! Firsfron of Ronchester 03:21, 13 July 2009 (UTC)
Thanks...
ITN for Australovenator, Diamantinasaurus and Wintonotitan
On In the news candidates page.
--BorgQueen (talk) 20:14, 4 July 2009 (UTC)
2009 hadrosaur chewing study
- I think with any article (media or not) there is a possibility of inaccuracies; that's why we check it with other sources, which is what I did in this Leonardo case. But I respect your opinion. I guess we'll just see where the AFD goes. — Hunter Kahn (c) 17:23, 5 July 2009 (UTC)
DYK for Gallardosaurus
On DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.
Wizardman 08:51, 10 July 2009 (UTC)
HerrerasaurusHey J,
After tomorrow, I am going on a 10-day wikibreak out of state, and may not have a ton of internet access. With the assistance of a lot of folks (including you... thanks, BTW) Herrerasaurus made it to FA, but there are still grammar adjustments that an editor wants to make. Can you take a look? I'm worried I won't be able to devote (much/any) time to genuine concerns over clarity. Firsfron of Ronchester 01:39, 30 July 2009 (UTC)
Carniadactylus.
Loch Ness Monster
- I think s/he’s almost figured out what was needed. Now, if only s/he could figure out how to enter citations fully … — SpikeToronto (talk) 17:21, 14 September 2009 (UTC)
- Well, it looks like it's taken care of, which goes on the positive side in my book. Thank you for the help! J. Spencer (talk) 03:09, 15 September 2009 (UTC)
Those hadrosaurs sure liked to eat, huh?
The Original Barnstar
For substantial additions to the Hadrosaur diet article, I salute you! Abyssal (talk) 03:55, 4 October 2009 (UTC)
Fruitadens
ITN for Fruitadens
On 22 October 2009, In the news was updated with a news item that involved the article Fruitadens, which you substantially updated. If you know of another interesting news item involving a recently created or updated article, then please suggest it on the candidates page.
--BorgQueen (talk) 16:32, 22 October 2009 (UTC)
RajasaurusHi!Spencer,
Congratulations for the GA upgarde of the artcile. Also thanks.--Nvvchar (talk) 18:34, 22 October 2009 (UTC)
Eld's DeerHi! Spencer,
Thanks for the message regarding
Eld's Deer was posted by me on DYK quite some months back and accepted. Since you are an expert in Fauna, will you please advice me if I should post it for GA upgrade. Thanks.--Nvvchar (talk) 02:04, 23 October 2009 (UTC)]
Re: Rajasaurus ga-rev
New find of Dinosaurs nestling ground in IndiaHi! Spencer,
A few days back I had read the above news item in several news papers in India. I have prepared a short write up on the same for any suitable insertion in the Portal or News item. Please see here
User:Nvvchar/sandbox/Ashokan Edicts (Delhi). You may kndly edit it suitably and if it has not appeared on the News page of WP you may consider posting it as a joint news item. Thanks.--Nvvchar (talk) 05:16, 28 October 2009 (UTC)]
Ceratonykus
ScienceDirectHi J,
Do you have access to ScienceDirect? I don't want to pay $31.50 for a paper which discusses "Teleocrater", especially when I don't know how detailed the portion on "Teleocrater" is. The cladogram from their analysis is viewable here, but that doesn't give me much to work with. I figured you being you, you might subscribe to their (rather expensive) service. If not, I'll just leave "Teleo" as he is for now. Firsfron of Ronchester 04:09, 12 November 2009 (UTC)
- Thanks J. As it turns out, a reference librarian I work with has access to the paper, so I now have it. Thanks again for offering. Take care, Firsfron of Ronchester 00:25, 13 November 2009 (UTC)
"Name"?
I know the scientific name should type in Name. But i see lots of scientific name in wikipedia were type in "Name". Why?
Is that official rules that Nomen nudum, Nomen oblitum, Nomen dubium should type in "Name"? or it is just a wikipedia rules? User:Devilfish1962 01:43, 26 Nov. 2009 (UTC)
96.239.237.62Hi, Firs;
I noticed you reverted
Bayosaurus". Having fixed a string of their edits this morning, I am 99% certain that this is the latest version of an editor who was recently blocked at 96.242.198.33 (talk · contribs) for inserting false dates, locations, and other information to paleo articles, and false episodes and voice actors to television shows. Something to keep an eye on, I suppose. J. Spencer (talk) 16:21, 28 November 2009 (UTC)]
- Hi J. Thanks. I wasn't aware of that. Something else to watch out for is this. Firsfron of Ronchester 17:07, 28 November 2009 (UTC)
ThescelosaurusHey J,
It looks like the Hungarian version of Thescelosaurus has become a FA! You're making a difference, even in languages you don't speak. :) (At least, I assume you don't speak Hungarian...) Firsfron of Ronchester 05:52, 30 November 2009 (UTC)
- That's a really weird discovery. I have the 2008 archosauriform histology study at work (I left it on my desk and I'm at home now), and they still treated "Teleocrater" as if it wasn't described. Despite being undescribed, the 2008 study, too, did give a lot of detail (about half a page, as I recall), as well as some illustrations. How does something remain "undescribed" when there's that much detail? I'll take another look tomorrow, but I'm pretty sure the '08 study didn't mention a specific epithet (or I would definitely have mentioned it in the article), and it certainly didn't mention "Thecodontosaurus" alophos or alphos. Firsfron of Ronchester 05:22, 1 December 2009 (UTC)
An idea I wanted to run by you
- I'm glad you like the idea. I doubt Naish and the gang would get too involved, but where the two projects overlap, they may be willing to help. I'm gonna do some more brain storming, maybe a rough draft or two and then send the Dinolist a message. Abyssal (talk) 00:28, 3 December 2009 (UTC)
DYK for Stegomosuchus
On DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.
Materialscientist (talk) 11:44, 3 December 2009 (UTC)
Category:Cretaceous dinosaursHello J. Spencer, I have an advise about Category of Dinosaurs. At present, there are 56 articles in Category:Triassic dinosaurs, 245 articles in Category:Jurassic dinosaurs, and 617 articles in Category:Cretaceous dinosaurs.
However, Cretaceous is around 80 million years long, almost equaled to Late Triassic adding Jurassic. Besides, the Lower Cretaceous Dinosaurs group and Upper Cretaceous Dinosaurs group have obvious differences. My advise is that 「Category:Cretaceous dinosaurs」 can be divided into 「Category:Lower Cretaceous dinosaurs」 and 「Category:Upper Cretaceous dinosaurs」.
Also, I have a question about Dinosaurs in Pakistan. There seveal Dinosaurs found in Pakistan, such as:
Balochisaurus. My question is that whether Pakistan was a part of Indian-Madagascar in Cretaceous, or just a part of Asia continent. If Pakistan was a part of Indian-Madagascar, maybe the above articles should be moved into Category:Dinosaurs of India and Madagascar
hoseumou(talk) 13:59, 12 December 2009 (UTC)
Hadrosaur bipedality
- Fair enough, although I still think it shouldn't be included in the Jurassic Park article for two reasons: the work is unpublished; and perhaps more importantly, it's a bit unfair to call the JP people on it when it was perfectly legitimate to have bipedal running hadrosaurs in the 1990s. I think the page should stick to things that were known to be inaccurate or questionable at the time of production, like sizes and creative embellishments (intelligence, pretty much anything to do with Dilophosaurus, etc.). J. Spencer (talk) 04:39, 7 January 2010 (UTC)
Service awards proposal
Hello, J. Spencer/Archive 3! I noticed you display a service award, and would like to invite you to join the discussion over a proposed revamping of the awards.
If you have any opinions on the proposal, please participate in the discussion. Thanks! — the Man in Question (in question) 04:14, 8 January 2010 (UTC)
Kinkonychelys.
- Thank you very much! Oh no! It's not here!!! (talk) 08:00, 12 January 2010 (UTC)
- Hi again! Following your suggestions, I've gotten the page's main content up to 1227 characters, but of course, it still falls short of the DYK requirement by nearly 300 characters. The only information I can see in the paper about the genus that can still be included is the physical descriptions of the different specimens, and personal experience tells me I'm not too handy when it comes to understanding all of the scientific words used in these descriptions. I really want this article to become a DYK article, though, and I've already seen a few facts in what's been included that might "impress the judges" substantially for inclusion in a DYK update. If it's no trouble, and if any of that information is notable for inclusion in the article, could you please help with adding it in? That would be very much appreciated! Oh no! It's not here!!! (talk) 09:58, 12 January 2010 (UTC)
- Thanks again! Oh no! It's not here!!! (talk) 23:05, 12 January 2010 (UTC)
- Thanks a million, J. Spencer!!! Oh no! It's not here!!! (talk) 00:27, 13 January 2010 (UTC)
Talk:Dinosaur archiving
Deinonychus
- Thank you! I'm not actually very familiar with IPA, but people who are set up the templates on the dinosaur articles, and since this one's been stable for a long time, I figured it was probably a gag or a test edit. J. Spencer (talk) 00:50, 21 January 2010 (UTC)
- I cannot read IPA either - I merely "sounded it out", as you might phrase it. ;) -RadicalOne•Contact Me•Chase My Tail 02:44, 21 January 2010 (UTC)
WikiProject Dinosaurs in the Signpost
Redirects and categories
- Well, it doesn't really bother me either way; it just looked funny having it on a redirect. Species of Psittacosaurus
- I added comments o how to improve the article. GamerPro64 (talk) 01:59, 5 February 2010 (UTC)]
- I sorry to bother you but did you have me give suggestions to improve the article so you can improve the it or for someone else who would want to? GamerPro64 (talk) 23:18, 6 February 2010 (UTC).
- Thank you, J. Spencer!!! Oh no! It's not here!!! (talk) 23:39, 7 February 2010 (UTC)
Reply
Rhabdognathus.
- Okay then. Thank you for the links! Oh no! It's not here!!! (talk) 07:25, 2 March 2010 (UTC)
Linheraptor.
- Thanks! Oh no! It's not here!!! (talk) 02:31, 21 March 2010 (UTC)
Guanlong imageHello,
I've uploaded some images yesterday and put them with some articles.
You said that my images weren't the kind that you're looking for.
Is this one a bit better?
Guanlong wucaii Kind regards from 82.169.6.135 (talk) 13:45, 1 April 2010 (UTC) or better known as Joerim on the Dutch Wikipedia.
Welcome back
Re: Penghusuchus
Brachi and Giraffatitan
- I am torn between keeping a tidy list at the bottom and placing them at first use. I guess the latter is simply more common, and also easier to work with once the text doesn't change much anymore. However, writing the Plateosaurus article showed me that for a total re-write a list at the end would have been better - I spent lots of time searching through the editor. So I guess I'll keep the alphabetical list, and once the text is ready for the main page I'll place the citation at the first use. HMallison (talk) 06:08, 12 May 2010 (UTC)
You're quite right to prod me - however, I must point to the sauropoda re-write, which is devloping into a physiology of dinosaurs update.... I had some rough weeks, work and kids' health wise, but hope to contribute the missing data within the next few days. Then the text will need a thorough massage - was that you vounteering??? ;) HMallison (talk) 06:45, 15 June 2010 (UTC)
- Give me a day or two more, and I'll have a rough structure ready. Then we should talk about it - may or may not be best to use your structure. HMallison (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 15:57, 16 June 2010 (UTC).
If you're into sauropods....here's a must read for you :) Long, boring, but a "deal-breaker", 'cause it has all you ever need to know and cite (I hope).
http://www3.interscience.wiley.com/cgi-bin/fulltext/123397084/HTMLSTART
PDF here:
http://www3.interscience.wiley.com/cgi-bin/fulltext/123397084/PDFSTART
HMallison (talk) 23:35, 16 May 2010 (UTC)
- well, it took me three years to understand it all - but that did involve the research, too ;) Aachenosaurus
- Dunno. I've gone ahead and semi-protected for a month. We'll see if it deters this fellow or fellows. Only the pages listed at Wikipedia:Pending changes/Testing are to be flagged for pending changes. Firsfron of Ronchester 04:10, 9 July 2010 (UTC)
Family treeHi, I'm from the Dutch Wikipedia. Because I want an article to be finished tommorow (I'm going on holliday) I needed help from someone quikly, so I come to you. Maybe you still know me from the illustration of the Guanlong. Here's the problem:
<font color="white">unnamed
<font color="white">unnamed
<font color="white">unnamed
Champsosauridae
<font color="white">unnamed
familie Simoedosauridae
<font color="white">unnamed
?
Champsosauridae
I've got two family trees. The upper one is good, but in front of it there has to be "familie Simoedosauridae", like with the second one. Can you help me, please? Kind regards from 82.169.6.135 (talk) 19:48, 14 July 2010 (UTC) or Joerim, as I'm known at the Dutch Wikipedia.
- Thank you very much! Only one thing, what mistake did I make when making one of these family trees? Kind regards from 82.169.6.135 (talk) 07:35, 15 July 2010 (UTC) or Joerim
Talkback
Concavenator imageHi, I uploaded an image to Concavenator but it was removed due to it not being anatomically rigorous. I did a new one, which is here http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Conc2.png I used this image http://images.nationalgeographic.com/wpf/media-live/photos/000/257/cache/humpback-dinosaur-life-reconstruction_25710_600x450.jpg as a model, but I don't know if mine is yet fit to be used in the article. Any help on how are images judged would be very appreciated (I also posted all this on the article's talk page but I don't know if it will get much attention there).
thank you very much
Nestor db (talk) 18:44, 10 September 2010 (UTC)
Parks ref
-
Tyrannosauridae
- I just wanted to make sure that it is ok to go ahead with teh article for a GAN and that the main contributors are ok with this. Nergaal (talk) 03:20, 11 September 2008 (UTC)]
- Just a quick question: why didn't you guys submit the Nergaal (talk) 00:44, 15 September 2008 (UTC)]
- I read the discussion and dobody specifies anything against nominating it. The only possible concern that might not be solvable during a GAN is the comprehensibility - in my opinion it looks good. Otherwise, the style issues can be solved. Again, to me it looks good. But I guess it is up to you if you want to nominate it. Nergaal (talk) 02:04, 15 September 2008 (UTC)]
- Actually better: the worst thing that could normally happen is to fail with some clear comments, and then with those comments someone can update the article and resubmit it for GAN. Nergaal (talk) 03:57, 11 November 2008 (UTC)]
Thanks a lot!
Congrats, J
- Thanks! J. Spencer (talk) 02:37, 28 September 2008 (UTC)
- Dude, I totally saw that article the other day. Was that you that was quoted in the article, J. Spence? Abyssal (talk) 04:36, 28 September 2008 (UTC)
- 'Tis (this is a nom de wiki ;) ). J. Spencer (talk) 14:50, 28 September 2008 (UTC)
- I had no idea you were involved in such awesomeness. I envy the hell out of you.Abyssal (talk) 15:48, 28 September 2008 (UTC)
- Thank you! I'm a bit surprised we haven't had IPs adding stuff from the press releases or documentary yet. J. Spencer (talk) 21:27, 28 September 2008 (UTC)
- Well, Leonardo isn't a "terrifying meat-eater related to T. rex", so don't hold your breath. I guess I could log in as an IP and randomly add some stuff in, if it makes you feel any better... ;) Firsfron of Ronchester 22:43, 28 September 2008 (UTC)
- Nah, it's no biggie. Eventually we got the lost and found Royal Ontario Barosaurus story, so this one should creep in at some point. The exhibit opening in Houston was pushed back a week because of Hurricane Ike, too. J. Spencer (talk) 22:51, 28 September 2008 (UTC)
Notice
{{{1}}}
Cite journal template changes
GA of Cultural depictions of dinosaurs
Albertonykus
Irano-Afgan
Hello, Cyrus111;
I'm sorry, but I'm not familiar enough with the topic to comment on sources. I just periodically disambiguate the term morphology, and Irano-Afghan came up in one of my earlier sweeps. I have fixed another wikilink for the article, though. If a source is authoritative, it should be used, although for basic information I would probably stick to the early 20th century anthropologists instead of modern websites. J. Spencer (talk) 16:22, 9 November 2008 (UTC)
Hi, well 2 sources are from coon the other from shool of Athens both from 20th century, so keep them??? I like how it unifies people and creates affinity and learns about history the problem is the texts that are put in the one from school of Athens where it has been modified, and also there is the text from Mr. Gregor. I should probably get more opinions on this matter so to reach a consensus Cyrus111 (talk) 16:59, 11 November 2008 (UTC)
Dinosaur Park Formation
My picsHey J. Spenser on the Abelisaurus page I put those pictures up. I am wondering if there are Dinosaurs that have had most of their body discovered can I make a size comparison? Nrg800 (talk)
Thanks that makes more sense. But is that diagram that I did for the fossil finds okay?
Nrg800 (talk) 06:33, 21 November 2008 (UTC)
Thank you alot for that Commons link I better get to work making a new one XD Nrg800 (talk) 07:30, 26 November 2008 (UTC)
Thanks
Azhdarch cat
Desert extinctness
Perfect!! Keep up the great work The Bald One White cat 18:45, 14 December 2008 (UTC)
Talk: List of dinosaurs
Stego distro
DYK for Peloroplites
On 24 December, 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Peloroplites, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.
BorgQueen (talk) 07:37, 24 December 2008 (UTC)
WP:DABS and 718 Bot
- Done! talk) 16:07, 17 January 2009 (UTC)]
Argentinosaurus
Pterosaurs format
- Great! :) Abyssal (talk) 00:15, 21 January 2009 (UTC)
- I tweaked the Q-Z section again so that it should look better on bigger monitors and/or higher resolutions. I haven't had a chance to look at it on my home monitor (at school now), so I thought I'd try to get some extra eyes on this until I can. Does it look any different/better/worse? Abyssal (talk) 16:08, 21 January 2009 (UTC)
- Thanks! That's what it should look like; it's what I see too. However, on the really large monitor's at my uni it actually looks wider, whereas the previous version left a big ugly gap. It looks a smidgen worse today on my monitor (and yours apparently) but it looks a heapload better that way on the monitors at school, and since people at schools form a large block of our viewers I think the tradeoff is justifiable. :) Abyssal (talk) 04:24, 22 January 2009 (UTC)
To J. Spencer
You edited what I said about Pterodactyls. While everything about them eating human babies was crap, Pterodactyl Awareness Month does exist. I have seen T-Shirts and calenders. Please revert the article. -Sabotage2595
Edmontosaurus
DYK for Akanthosuchus
On February 14, 2009, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Akanthosuchus, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.
--Dravecky (talk) 04:22, 14 February 2009 (UTC)
Birds and dinosaurs
- Yeah, every so often some well-intentioned type comes along and removes "non-avian" from a dinosaur article. It beats the incredible expanding theropods and the cartoon cameo edits. J. Spencer (talk) 23:35, 25 February 2009 (UTC)
Barnstar
The Original Barnstar
For all-around good work, I award J. Spencer this Barnstar. Keep it up!--ragesoss (talk) 00:22, 26 February 2009 (UTC)
No lapsus calami in poposauridae?
Thanks
Dibothrosuchus
- Done! talk) 19:49, 7 March 2009 (UTC)
DYK for Miragaia (dinosaur)
On Miragaia (dinosaur), which you recently nominated. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.
Royalbroil 02:11, 6 March 2009 (UTC)
Edmontosaurus
DYK for Phyllodontosuchus
On March 9, 2009, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Phyllodontosuchus, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.
Shubinator (talk) 00:23, 9 March 2009 (UTC)
DYK for Dibothrosuchus
On March 12, 2009, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Dibothrosuchus, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.
Congratulations! PeterSymonds (talk) 22:13, 12 March 2009 (UTC)
Edmontosaurus
The entire article needs its prose reviewed; I merely listed items from the lead for starters. Regarding the use of animal: it's good to state the obvious, it's an easy-to-grasp non-jargon-y word, and it saves you from having to say the animal's name or "it" a lot. 05:01, 17 March 2009 (UTC)
DYK
Argentinosaurus againHello, I search for help about Argentinosaurus again. It seems that there are three papers about Argentinosaurus in 90s, such as:
- Appenzeller, T. 1994. Argentine dinos vie for heavyweight titles. Science 266, 1805.
- Paul, G.S. 1994. Is Garden Park home to the world’s largest known land animal? Garden Park Paleontology Society 4, 5.
- Paul, G.S. 1997. Dinosaur models: the good, the bad, and using them to estimate the mass of dinosaurs. In Wolberg, D.L., Stump, E. and Rosenberg, G.D. (eds), DinoFest International Proceedings, pp
But i can't find these papers in internet. Can you search these papers, and find out the length and weight of Argentinosaurus in these papers?
I'll be very thankful if you can help me, thanks. hoseumou 08:40, 28 March 2009 (UTC)
- Thanks you for your answer. But i have a question, it seems that [Early reconstructions estimated...] directly comes from Dinosaur Mailing List. Is that techniquely enough to be a reference? Finally, I have to say I very admired your dinosaur article, such as Edmontosaurus. :) hoseumou 07:43, 31 March 2009 (UTC)
QuinceratopsHi, Firs;
You'd better nail the article, too. J. Spencer (talk) 18:02, 24 May 2009 (UTC)
- Thanks J. The article was still redlinked when I removed it from Ceratopsidae. I'm not sure what to do about the image on Commons, File:Quinceratops 03869.JPG. Probably someone should be notified. Firsfron of Ronchester 18:15, 24 May 2009 (UTC)
- Moab man can probably be salvaged, given time (and a little TNT). Firsfron of Ronchester 19:33, 24 May 2009 (UTC)]
Piveteausaurus
RajasaurusHi! Spencer,
The following are quoated from Rjanag's talk page.
May I request you to please revisit the above article to review the tag, since another expert on the subject has edited it?--Nvvchar (talk) 09:46, 16 May 2009 (UTC)
- Hey Nvvchar, sorry it's taken me so long to get back. Anyway, it would probably be better to ask J. Spencer about this, since he's the one who did the rewriting and he's more familiar with the content. I'm sure that if he went through it it's probably all fine now, but I'd feel more comfortable letting him remove the tag (since he knows what the state of the article is, whereas all I can do right now is assume—and I'd rather not go through one sentence at a time, as JSpencer probably already has). rʨanaɢ talk/contribs 21:18, 30 May 2009 (UTC)
Since, as a well known expert in the field, you have edited the version of Rajasaurus after Rjanag,s tag, which was earlier also edited by a group of users of the
Dinosaurs Portal with extensive experience in this field, would you kindly consider removing the tag on the article? I am in the process of getting some pictures of Rajasuarus model erected in Lucknow India posted on the article. Thanks--Nvvchar (talk) 02:58, 31 May 2009 (UTC)]
- Thank you very much. I hope I will have opportunities in the near future on the ]
- Can you nominate this article for GA status since it is already assessed as "B" class and many of
Dinosaurs portal members like yourself and others have put in a lot of effort to improve it?--Nvvchar (talk) 15:37, 1 August 2009 (UTC)]
Heterodontosauridae
- I highly doubt that somebody would consider it OR, but it's better to be safe than sorry. Thanks for contacting the other editor, and hopefully a source can be found for it. --Happy editing! Nehrams2020 (talk • contrib) 05:04, 2 June 2009 (UTC)
Piveteau's brain probably was bigger than a walnut
- I think it's great. I think he was a scientific illustrator also; although many scientists at the time did their own illustrations, he was known for his. I tried to confirm this information to include in the article but found nothing specific. The illustrations can be included in both the dinosaur and bio articles, if you can get decent copies. If you don't get decent copies, and I have time, I can resketch at least the most important one of them if they're out of copyright. --69.226.103.13 (talk) 22:56, 2 June 2009 (UTC)
User 173.35.129.119 issues....I just undid a half dozen bad edits of his...again. He just got the temporary ban lifted and is right back at it..
it's gotten to where someone needs to get a perma ban put on that IP address. It's vandalism at this point. I don't know if you have that ability or can get in contact with someone who does, but it's really time. Forescore68 (talk) 16:15, 13 June 2009 (UTC)
- Oh, and thanks for cleaning up my Chuandongocoelurus mess...I did it in a huffy. Glad I don't lose points in this forum for being hasty and dumb...Forescore68 (talk) 02:33, 18 June 2009 (UTC)
Italictitle templateHi, Firs;
I just found out something useful about the italictitle template: I already knew that if it is put at the top, it prevents the uppermost [edit] bracket from showing. However, if it's put below the taxobox, as Bob did at Pteranodon and I just did with Allosaurus, it doesn't interfere. I don't know if this has editing drawbacks, but it's very good to know we can get back the edit bracket for the lede section, especially for ginormous articles. J. Spencer (talk) 01:35, 17 June 2009 (UTC)
- Hey!
- I didn't realize it prevents the uppermost edit link from showing. We might want to bring this up at tree of life. Either this should be fixed through the template itself, or I could possibly AWB it; I think there is a pretty easy way to delete the template name while substituting the same template name immediately below the taxobox. If this is acceptable to you (and everyone else who works in these areas), I could work on this tomorrow. Thanks for catching this. Firsfron of Ronchester 06:17, 17 June 2009 (UTC).
- P.S. Also, I'd like to make sure I interpreted everything I've included in the article correctly. Thanks in advance! Mess around with the guy in shades all you like - don't mess around with the girl in gloves! (talk) 08:28, 26 June 2009 (UTC)
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template. Mess around with the guy in shades all you like - don't mess around with the girl in gloves! (talk) 00:41, 27 June 2009 (UTC)
- I reveiewed the DYK hook for this, and everything looks fine except that I had some minor wording changes to the hook. If you are okay with those changes, please indicate so in its DYK submission at Template talk:Did You Know#Gallardosaurus and I can approve the hook. Rlendog (talk) 02:17, 8 July 2009 (UTC)]
New hoaxHi, Firs;
Here's a new one to nail, if it's still here by the time you read this: Rorasaurus. J. Spencer (talk) 13:19, 1 July 2009 (UTC)
(I'd watch Roarasaurus too, as they may try to recreate it.) J. Spencer (talk) 13:27, 1 July 2009 (UTC)
- Thanks. I've just nuked it. Firsfron of Ronchester 13:53, 1 July 2009 (UTC)
- Yeah, I'm going to start re-inquiring about the possibility of fixing WP:DABS. As you say, if some random IP hadn't added the name to the List, you wouldn't have noticed it. That's not good. Firsfron of Ronchester 00:47, 2 July 2009 (UTC)
- It's true: DABS was just one way of catching potential hoaxes (or very short new articles that editors sometimes create), but it was nice to have that option. Firsfron of Ronchester 04:32, 2 July 2009 (UTC)
- I had no idea it would be that easy. Request, and within an hour, voila! Firsfron of Ronchester 03:21, 13 July 2009 (UTC)
Thanks...
ITN for Australovenator, Diamantinasaurus and Wintonotitan
On In the news candidates page.
--BorgQueen (talk) 20:14, 4 July 2009 (UTC)
2009 hadrosaur chewing study
- I think with any article (media or not) there is a possibility of inaccuracies; that's why we check it with other sources, which is what I did in this Leonardo case. But I respect your opinion. I guess we'll just see where the AFD goes. — Hunter Kahn (c) 17:23, 5 July 2009 (UTC)
DYK for Gallardosaurus
On DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.
Wizardman 08:51, 10 July 2009 (UTC)
HerrerasaurusHey J,
After tomorrow, I am going on a 10-day wikibreak out of state, and may not have a ton of internet access. With the assistance of a lot of folks (including you... thanks, BTW) Herrerasaurus made it to FA, but there are still grammar adjustments that an editor wants to make. Can you take a look? I'm worried I won't be able to devote (much/any) time to genuine concerns over clarity. Firsfron of Ronchester 01:39, 30 July 2009 (UTC)
Carniadactylus.
Loch Ness Monster
- I think s/he’s almost figured out what was needed. Now, if only s/he could figure out how to enter citations fully … — SpikeToronto (talk) 17:21, 14 September 2009 (UTC)
- Well, it looks like it's taken care of, which goes on the positive side in my book. Thank you for the help! J. Spencer (talk) 03:09, 15 September 2009 (UTC)
Those hadrosaurs sure liked to eat, huh?
The Original Barnstar
For substantial additions to the Hadrosaur diet article, I salute you! Abyssal (talk) 03:55, 4 October 2009 (UTC)
Fruitadens
ITN for Fruitadens
On 22 October 2009, In the news was updated with a news item that involved the article Fruitadens, which you substantially updated. If you know of another interesting news item involving a recently created or updated article, then please suggest it on the candidates page.
--BorgQueen (talk) 16:32, 22 October 2009 (UTC)
RajasaurusHi!Spencer,
Congratulations for the GA upgarde of the artcile. Also thanks.--Nvvchar (talk) 18:34, 22 October 2009 (UTC)
Eld's DeerHi! Spencer,
Thanks for the message regarding
Eld's Deer was posted by me on DYK quite some months back and accepted. Since you are an expert in Fauna, will you please advice me if I should post it for GA upgrade. Thanks.--Nvvchar (talk) 02:04, 23 October 2009 (UTC)]
Re: Rajasaurus ga-rev
New find of Dinosaurs nestling ground in IndiaHi! Spencer,
A few days back I had read the above news item in several news papers in India. I have prepared a short write up on the same for any suitable insertion in the Portal or News item. Please see here
User:Nvvchar/sandbox/Ashokan Edicts (Delhi). You may kndly edit it suitably and if it has not appeared on the News page of WP you may consider posting it as a joint news item. Thanks.--Nvvchar (talk) 05:16, 28 October 2009 (UTC)]
Ceratonykus
ScienceDirectHi J,
Do you have access to ScienceDirect? I don't want to pay $31.50 for a paper which discusses "Teleocrater", especially when I don't know how detailed the portion on "Teleocrater" is. The cladogram from their analysis is viewable here, but that doesn't give me much to work with. I figured you being you, you might subscribe to their (rather expensive) service. If not, I'll just leave "Teleo" as he is for now. Firsfron of Ronchester 04:09, 12 November 2009 (UTC)
- Thanks J. As it turns out, a reference librarian I work with has access to the paper, so I now have it. Thanks again for offering. Take care, Firsfron of Ronchester 00:25, 13 November 2009 (UTC)
"Name"?
I know the scientific name should type in Name. But i see lots of scientific name in wikipedia were type in "Name". Why?
Is that official rules that Nomen nudum, Nomen oblitum, Nomen dubium should type in "Name"? or it is just a wikipedia rules? User:Devilfish1962 01:43, 26 Nov. 2009 (UTC)
96.239.237.62Hi, Firs;
I noticed you reverted
Bayosaurus". Having fixed a string of their edits this morning, I am 99% certain that this is the latest version of an editor who was recently blocked at 96.242.198.33 (talk · contribs) for inserting false dates, locations, and other information to paleo articles, and false episodes and voice actors to television shows. Something to keep an eye on, I suppose. J. Spencer (talk) 16:21, 28 November 2009 (UTC)]
- Hi J. Thanks. I wasn't aware of that. Something else to watch out for is this. Firsfron of Ronchester 17:07, 28 November 2009 (UTC)
ThescelosaurusHey J,
It looks like the Hungarian version of Thescelosaurus has become a FA! You're making a difference, even in languages you don't speak. :) (At least, I assume you don't speak Hungarian...) Firsfron of Ronchester 05:52, 30 November 2009 (UTC)
- That's a really weird discovery. I have the 2008 archosauriform histology study at work (I left it on my desk and I'm at home now), and they still treated "Teleocrater" as if it wasn't described. Despite being undescribed, the 2008 study, too, did give a lot of detail (about half a page, as I recall), as well as some illustrations. How does something remain "undescribed" when there's that much detail? I'll take another look tomorrow, but I'm pretty sure the '08 study didn't mention a specific epithet (or I would definitely have mentioned it in the article), and it certainly didn't mention "Thecodontosaurus" alophos or alphos. Firsfron of Ronchester 05:22, 1 December 2009 (UTC)
An idea I wanted to run by you
- I'm glad you like the idea. I doubt Naish and the gang would get too involved, but where the two projects overlap, they may be willing to help. I'm gonna do some more brain storming, maybe a rough draft or two and then send the Dinolist a message. Abyssal (talk) 00:28, 3 December 2009 (UTC)
DYK for Stegomosuchus
On DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.
Materialscientist (talk) 11:44, 3 December 2009 (UTC)
Category:Cretaceous dinosaursHello J. Spencer, I have an advise about Category of Dinosaurs. At present, there are 56 articles in Category:Triassic dinosaurs, 245 articles in Category:Jurassic dinosaurs, and 617 articles in Category:Cretaceous dinosaurs.
However, Cretaceous is around 80 million years long, almost equaled to Late Triassic adding Jurassic. Besides, the Lower Cretaceous Dinosaurs group and Upper Cretaceous Dinosaurs group have obvious differences. My advise is that 「Category:Cretaceous dinosaurs」 can be divided into 「Category:Lower Cretaceous dinosaurs」 and 「Category:Upper Cretaceous dinosaurs」.
Also, I have a question about Dinosaurs in Pakistan. There seveal Dinosaurs found in Pakistan, such as:
Balochisaurus. My question is that whether Pakistan was a part of Indian-Madagascar in Cretaceous, or just a part of Asia continent. If Pakistan was a part of Indian-Madagascar, maybe the above articles should be moved into Category:Dinosaurs of India and Madagascar
hoseumou(talk) 13:59, 12 December 2009 (UTC)
Hadrosaur bipedality
- Fair enough, although I still think it shouldn't be included in the Jurassic Park article for two reasons: the work is unpublished; and perhaps more importantly, it's a bit unfair to call the JP people on it when it was perfectly legitimate to have bipedal running hadrosaurs in the 1990s. I think the page should stick to things that were known to be inaccurate or questionable at the time of production, like sizes and creative embellishments (intelligence, pretty much anything to do with Dilophosaurus, etc.). J. Spencer (talk) 04:39, 7 January 2010 (UTC)
Service awards proposal
Hello, J. Spencer/Archive 3! I noticed you display a service award, and would like to invite you to join the discussion over a proposed revamping of the awards.
If you have any opinions on the proposal, please participate in the discussion. Thanks! — the Man in Question (in question) 04:14, 8 January 2010 (UTC)
Kinkonychelys.
- Thank you very much! Oh no! It's not here!!! (talk) 08:00, 12 January 2010 (UTC)
- Hi again! Following your suggestions, I've gotten the page's main content up to 1227 characters, but of course, it still falls short of the DYK requirement by nearly 300 characters. The only information I can see in the paper about the genus that can still be included is the physical descriptions of the different specimens, and personal experience tells me I'm not too handy when it comes to understanding all of the scientific words used in these descriptions. I really want this article to become a DYK article, though, and I've already seen a few facts in what's been included that might "impress the judges" substantially for inclusion in a DYK update. If it's no trouble, and if any of that information is notable for inclusion in the article, could you please help with adding it in? That would be very much appreciated! Oh no! It's not here!!! (talk) 09:58, 12 January 2010 (UTC)
- Thanks again! Oh no! It's not here!!! (talk) 23:05, 12 January 2010 (UTC)
- Thanks a million, J. Spencer!!! Oh no! It's not here!!! (talk) 00:27, 13 January 2010 (UTC)
Talk:Dinosaur archiving
Deinonychus
- Thank you! I'm not actually very familiar with IPA, but people who are set up the templates on the dinosaur articles, and since this one's been stable for a long time, I figured it was probably a gag or a test edit. J. Spencer (talk) 00:50, 21 January 2010 (UTC)
- I cannot read IPA either - I merely "sounded it out", as you might phrase it. ;) -RadicalOne•Contact Me•Chase My Tail 02:44, 21 January 2010 (UTC)
WikiProject Dinosaurs in the Signpost
Redirects and categories
- Well, it doesn't really bother me either way; it just looked funny having it on a redirect. Species of Psittacosaurus
- I added comments o how to improve the article. GamerPro64 (talk) 01:59, 5 February 2010 (UTC)]
- I sorry to bother you but did you have me give suggestions to improve the article so you can improve the it or for someone else who would want to? GamerPro64 (talk) 23:18, 6 February 2010 (UTC).
- Thank you, J. Spencer!!! Oh no! It's not here!!! (talk) 23:39, 7 February 2010 (UTC)
Reply
Rhabdognathus.
- Okay then. Thank you for the links! Oh no! It's not here!!! (talk) 07:25, 2 March 2010 (UTC)
Linheraptor.
- Thanks! Oh no! It's not here!!! (talk) 02:31, 21 March 2010 (UTC)
Guanlong imageHello,
I've uploaded some images yesterday and put them with some articles.
You said that my images weren't the kind that you're looking for.
Is this one a bit better?
Guanlong wucaii Kind regards from 82.169.6.135 (talk) 13:45, 1 April 2010 (UTC) or better known as Joerim on the Dutch Wikipedia.
Welcome back
Re: Penghusuchus
Brachi and Giraffatitan
- I am torn between keeping a tidy list at the bottom and placing them at first use. I guess the latter is simply more common, and also easier to work with once the text doesn't change much anymore. However, writing the Plateosaurus article showed me that for a total re-write a list at the end would have been better - I spent lots of time searching through the editor. So I guess I'll keep the alphabetical list, and once the text is ready for the main page I'll place the citation at the first use. HMallison (talk) 06:08, 12 May 2010 (UTC)
You're quite right to prod me - however, I must point to the sauropoda re-write, which is devloping into a physiology of dinosaurs update.... I had some rough weeks, work and kids' health wise, but hope to contribute the missing data within the next few days. Then the text will need a thorough massage - was that you vounteering??? ;) HMallison (talk) 06:45, 15 June 2010 (UTC)
- Give me a day or two more, and I'll have a rough structure ready. Then we should talk about it - may or may not be best to use your structure. HMallison (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 15:57, 16 June 2010 (UTC).
If you're into sauropods....here's a must read for you :) Long, boring, but a "deal-breaker", 'cause it has all you ever need to know and cite (I hope).
http://www3.interscience.wiley.com/cgi-bin/fulltext/123397084/HTMLSTART
PDF here:
http://www3.interscience.wiley.com/cgi-bin/fulltext/123397084/PDFSTART
HMallison (talk) 23:35, 16 May 2010 (UTC)
- well, it took me three years to understand it all - but that did involve the research, too ;) Aachenosaurus
- Dunno. I've gone ahead and semi-protected for a month. We'll see if it deters this fellow or fellows. Only the pages listed at Wikipedia:Pending changes/Testing are to be flagged for pending changes. Firsfron of Ronchester 04:10, 9 July 2010 (UTC)
Family treeHi, I'm from the Dutch Wikipedia. Because I want an article to be finished tommorow (I'm going on holliday) I needed help from someone quikly, so I come to you. Maybe you still know me from the illustration of the Guanlong. Here's the problem:
<font color="white">unnamed
<font color="white">unnamed
<font color="white">unnamed
Champsosauridae
<font color="white">unnamed
familie Simoedosauridae
<font color="white">unnamed
?
Champsosauridae
I've got two family trees. The upper one is good, but in front of it there has to be "familie Simoedosauridae", like with the second one. Can you help me, please? Kind regards from 82.169.6.135 (talk) 19:48, 14 July 2010 (UTC) or Joerim, as I'm known at the Dutch Wikipedia.
- Thank you very much! Only one thing, what mistake did I make when making one of these family trees? Kind regards from 82.169.6.135 (talk) 07:35, 15 July 2010 (UTC) or Joerim
Talkback
Concavenator imageHi, I uploaded an image to Concavenator but it was removed due to it not being anatomically rigorous. I did a new one, which is here http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Conc2.png I used this image http://images.nationalgeographic.com/wpf/media-live/photos/000/257/cache/humpback-dinosaur-life-reconstruction_25710_600x450.jpg as a model, but I don't know if mine is yet fit to be used in the article. Any help on how are images judged would be very appreciated (I also posted all this on the article's talk page but I don't know if it will get much attention there).
thank you very much
Nestor db (talk) 18:44, 10 September 2010 (UTC)
Parks ref
-
- Just a quick question: why didn't you guys submit the Nergaal (talk) 00:44, 15 September 2008 (UTC)]
- I read the discussion and dobody specifies anything against nominating it. The only possible concern that might not be solvable during a GAN is the comprehensibility - in my opinion it looks good. Otherwise, the style issues can be solved. Again, to me it looks good. But I guess it is up to you if you want to nominate it. Nergaal (talk) 02:04, 15 September 2008 (UTC)]
- Actually better: the worst thing that could normally happen is to fail with some clear comments, and then with those comments someone can update the article and resubmit it for GAN. Nergaal (talk) 03:57, 11 November 2008 (UTC)]
- Actually better: the worst thing that could normally happen is to fail with some clear comments, and then with those comments someone can update the article and resubmit it for GAN.
- I read the discussion and dobody specifies anything against nominating it. The only possible concern that might not be solvable during a GAN is the comprehensibility - in my opinion it looks good. Otherwise, the style issues can be solved. Again, to me it looks good. But I guess it is up to you if you want to nominate it.
Thanks a lot!
Congrats, J
- Thanks! J. Spencer (talk) 02:37, 28 September 2008 (UTC)
- Dude, I totally saw that article the other day. Was that you that was quoted in the article, J. Spence? Abyssal (talk) 04:36, 28 September 2008 (UTC)
- 'Tis (this is a nom de wiki ;) ). J. Spencer (talk) 14:50, 28 September 2008 (UTC)
- I had no idea you were involved in such awesomeness. I envy the hell out of you.Abyssal (talk) 15:48, 28 September 2008 (UTC)
- Thank you! I'm a bit surprised we haven't had IPs adding stuff from the press releases or documentary yet. J. Spencer (talk) 21:27, 28 September 2008 (UTC)
- Well, Leonardo isn't a "terrifying meat-eater related to T. rex", so don't hold your breath. I guess I could log in as an IP and randomly add some stuff in, if it makes you feel any better... ;) Firsfron of Ronchester 22:43, 28 September 2008 (UTC)
- Nah, it's no biggie. Eventually we got the lost and found Royal Ontario Barosaurus story, so this one should creep in at some point. The exhibit opening in Houston was pushed back a week because of Hurricane Ike, too. J. Spencer (talk) 22:51, 28 September 2008 (UTC)
Notice
{{{1}}}
Cite journal template changes
GA of Cultural depictions of dinosaurs
Albertonykus
Irano-Afgan
Hello, Cyrus111;
I'm sorry, but I'm not familiar enough with the topic to comment on sources. I just periodically disambiguate the term morphology, and Irano-Afghan came up in one of my earlier sweeps. I have fixed another wikilink for the article, though. If a source is authoritative, it should be used, although for basic information I would probably stick to the early 20th century anthropologists instead of modern websites. J. Spencer (talk) 16:22, 9 November 2008 (UTC)
Hi, well 2 sources are from coon the other from shool of Athens both from 20th century, so keep them??? I like how it unifies people and creates affinity and learns about history the problem is the texts that are put in the one from school of Athens where it has been modified, and also there is the text from Mr. Gregor. I should probably get more opinions on this matter so to reach a consensus Cyrus111 (talk) 16:59, 11 November 2008 (UTC)
Dinosaur Park Formation
My picsHey J. Spenser on the Abelisaurus page I put those pictures up. I am wondering if there are Dinosaurs that have had most of their body discovered can I make a size comparison? Nrg800 (talk)
Thanks that makes more sense. But is that diagram that I did for the fossil finds okay?
Nrg800 (talk) 06:33, 21 November 2008 (UTC)
Thank you alot for that Commons link I better get to work making a new one XD Nrg800 (talk) 07:30, 26 November 2008 (UTC)
Thanks
Azhdarch cat
Desert extinctness
Perfect!! Keep up the great work The Bald One White cat 18:45, 14 December 2008 (UTC)
Talk: List of dinosaurs
Stego distro
DYK for Peloroplites
On 24 December, 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Peloroplites, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.
BorgQueen (talk) 07:37, 24 December 2008 (UTC)
WP:DABS and 718 Bot
- Done! talk) 16:07, 17 January 2009 (UTC)]
Argentinosaurus
Pterosaurs format
- Great! :) Abyssal (talk) 00:15, 21 January 2009 (UTC)
- I tweaked the Q-Z section again so that it should look better on bigger monitors and/or higher resolutions. I haven't had a chance to look at it on my home monitor (at school now), so I thought I'd try to get some extra eyes on this until I can. Does it look any different/better/worse? Abyssal (talk) 16:08, 21 January 2009 (UTC)
- Thanks! That's what it should look like; it's what I see too. However, on the really large monitor's at my uni it actually looks wider, whereas the previous version left a big ugly gap. It looks a smidgen worse today on my monitor (and yours apparently) but it looks a heapload better that way on the monitors at school, and since people at schools form a large block of our viewers I think the tradeoff is justifiable. :) Abyssal (talk) 04:24, 22 January 2009 (UTC)
To J. Spencer
You edited what I said about Pterodactyls. While everything about them eating human babies was crap, Pterodactyl Awareness Month does exist. I have seen T-Shirts and calenders. Please revert the article. -Sabotage2595
Edmontosaurus
DYK for Akanthosuchus
On February 14, 2009, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Akanthosuchus, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.
--Dravecky (talk) 04:22, 14 February 2009 (UTC)
Birds and dinosaurs
- Yeah, every so often some well-intentioned type comes along and removes "non-avian" from a dinosaur article. It beats the incredible expanding theropods and the cartoon cameo edits. J. Spencer (talk) 23:35, 25 February 2009 (UTC)
Barnstar
The Original Barnstar
For all-around good work, I award J. Spencer this Barnstar. Keep it up!--ragesoss (talk) 00:22, 26 February 2009 (UTC)
No lapsus calami in poposauridae?
Thanks
Dibothrosuchus
- Done! talk) 19:49, 7 March 2009 (UTC)
DYK for Miragaia (dinosaur)
On Miragaia (dinosaur), which you recently nominated. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.
Royalbroil 02:11, 6 March 2009 (UTC)
Edmontosaurus
DYK for Phyllodontosuchus
On March 9, 2009, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Phyllodontosuchus, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.
Shubinator (talk) 00:23, 9 March 2009 (UTC)
DYK for Dibothrosuchus
On March 12, 2009, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Dibothrosuchus, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.
Congratulations! PeterSymonds (talk) 22:13, 12 March 2009 (UTC)
Edmontosaurus
The entire article needs its prose reviewed; I merely listed items from the lead for starters. Regarding the use of animal: it's good to state the obvious, it's an easy-to-grasp non-jargon-y word, and it saves you from having to say the animal's name or "it" a lot. 05:01, 17 March 2009 (UTC)
DYK
Argentinosaurus againHello, I search for help about Argentinosaurus again. It seems that there are three papers about Argentinosaurus in 90s, such as:
- Appenzeller, T. 1994. Argentine dinos vie for heavyweight titles. Science 266, 1805.
- Paul, G.S. 1994. Is Garden Park home to the world’s largest known land animal? Garden Park Paleontology Society 4, 5.
- Paul, G.S. 1997. Dinosaur models: the good, the bad, and using them to estimate the mass of dinosaurs. In Wolberg, D.L., Stump, E. and Rosenberg, G.D. (eds), DinoFest International Proceedings, pp
But i can't find these papers in internet. Can you search these papers, and find out the length and weight of Argentinosaurus in these papers?
I'll be very thankful if you can help me, thanks. hoseumou 08:40, 28 March 2009 (UTC)
- Thanks you for your answer. But i have a question, it seems that [Early reconstructions estimated...] directly comes from Dinosaur Mailing List. Is that techniquely enough to be a reference? Finally, I have to say I very admired your dinosaur article, such as Edmontosaurus. :) hoseumou 07:43, 31 March 2009 (UTC)
QuinceratopsHi, Firs;
You'd better nail the article, too. J. Spencer (talk) 18:02, 24 May 2009 (UTC)
- Thanks J. The article was still redlinked when I removed it from Ceratopsidae. I'm not sure what to do about the image on Commons, File:Quinceratops 03869.JPG. Probably someone should be notified. Firsfron of Ronchester 18:15, 24 May 2009 (UTC)
- Moab man can probably be salvaged, given time (and a little TNT). Firsfron of Ronchester 19:33, 24 May 2009 (UTC)]
Piveteausaurus
RajasaurusHi! Spencer,
The following are quoated from Rjanag's talk page.
May I request you to please revisit the above article to review the tag, since another expert on the subject has edited it?--Nvvchar (talk) 09:46, 16 May 2009 (UTC)
- Hey Nvvchar, sorry it's taken me so long to get back. Anyway, it would probably be better to ask J. Spencer about this, since he's the one who did the rewriting and he's more familiar with the content. I'm sure that if he went through it it's probably all fine now, but I'd feel more comfortable letting him remove the tag (since he knows what the state of the article is, whereas all I can do right now is assume—and I'd rather not go through one sentence at a time, as JSpencer probably already has). rʨanaɢ talk/contribs 21:18, 30 May 2009 (UTC)
Since, as a well known expert in the field, you have edited the version of Rajasaurus after Rjanag,s tag, which was earlier also edited by a group of users of the
Dinosaurs Portal with extensive experience in this field, would you kindly consider removing the tag on the article? I am in the process of getting some pictures of Rajasuarus model erected in Lucknow India posted on the article. Thanks--Nvvchar (talk) 02:58, 31 May 2009 (UTC)]
- Thank you very much. I hope I will have opportunities in the near future on the ]
- Can you nominate this article for GA status since it is already assessed as "B" class and many of
Dinosaurs portal members like yourself and others have put in a lot of effort to improve it?--Nvvchar (talk) 15:37, 1 August 2009 (UTC)]
Heterodontosauridae
- I highly doubt that somebody would consider it OR, but it's better to be safe than sorry. Thanks for contacting the other editor, and hopefully a source can be found for it. --Happy editing! Nehrams2020 (talk • contrib) 05:04, 2 June 2009 (UTC)
Piveteau's brain probably was bigger than a walnut
- I think it's great. I think he was a scientific illustrator also; although many scientists at the time did their own illustrations, he was known for his. I tried to confirm this information to include in the article but found nothing specific. The illustrations can be included in both the dinosaur and bio articles, if you can get decent copies. If you don't get decent copies, and I have time, I can resketch at least the most important one of them if they're out of copyright. --69.226.103.13 (talk) 22:56, 2 June 2009 (UTC)
User 173.35.129.119 issues....I just undid a half dozen bad edits of his...again. He just got the temporary ban lifted and is right back at it..
it's gotten to where someone needs to get a perma ban put on that IP address. It's vandalism at this point. I don't know if you have that ability or can get in contact with someone who does, but it's really time. Forescore68 (talk) 16:15, 13 June 2009 (UTC)
- Oh, and thanks for cleaning up my Chuandongocoelurus mess...I did it in a huffy. Glad I don't lose points in this forum for being hasty and dumb...Forescore68 (talk) 02:33, 18 June 2009 (UTC)
Italictitle templateHi, Firs;
I just found out something useful about the italictitle template: I already knew that if it is put at the top, it prevents the uppermost [edit] bracket from showing. However, if it's put below the taxobox, as Bob did at Pteranodon and I just did with Allosaurus, it doesn't interfere. I don't know if this has editing drawbacks, but it's very good to know we can get back the edit bracket for the lede section, especially for ginormous articles. J. Spencer (talk) 01:35, 17 June 2009 (UTC)
- Hey!
- I didn't realize it prevents the uppermost edit link from showing. We might want to bring this up at tree of life. Either this should be fixed through the template itself, or I could possibly AWB it; I think there is a pretty easy way to delete the template name while substituting the same template name immediately below the taxobox. If this is acceptable to you (and everyone else who works in these areas), I could work on this tomorrow. Thanks for catching this. Firsfron of Ronchester 06:17, 17 June 2009 (UTC).
- P.S. Also, I'd like to make sure I interpreted everything I've included in the article correctly. Thanks in advance! Mess around with the guy in shades all you like - don't mess around with the girl in gloves! (talk) 08:28, 26 June 2009 (UTC)
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template. Mess around with the guy in shades all you like - don't mess around with the girl in gloves! (talk) 00:41, 27 June 2009 (UTC)
- I reveiewed the DYK hook for this, and everything looks fine except that I had some minor wording changes to the hook. If you are okay with those changes, please indicate so in its DYK submission at Template talk:Did You Know#Gallardosaurus and I can approve the hook. Rlendog (talk) 02:17, 8 July 2009 (UTC)]
New hoaxHi, Firs;
Here's a new one to nail, if it's still here by the time you read this: Rorasaurus. J. Spencer (talk) 13:19, 1 July 2009 (UTC)
(I'd watch Roarasaurus too, as they may try to recreate it.) J. Spencer (talk) 13:27, 1 July 2009 (UTC)
- Thanks. I've just nuked it. Firsfron of Ronchester 13:53, 1 July 2009 (UTC)
- Yeah, I'm going to start re-inquiring about the possibility of fixing WP:DABS. As you say, if some random IP hadn't added the name to the List, you wouldn't have noticed it. That's not good. Firsfron of Ronchester 00:47, 2 July 2009 (UTC)
- It's true: DABS was just one way of catching potential hoaxes (or very short new articles that editors sometimes create), but it was nice to have that option. Firsfron of Ronchester 04:32, 2 July 2009 (UTC)
- I had no idea it would be that easy. Request, and within an hour, voila! Firsfron of Ronchester 03:21, 13 July 2009 (UTC)
Thanks...
ITN for Australovenator, Diamantinasaurus and Wintonotitan
On In the news candidates page.
--BorgQueen (talk) 20:14, 4 July 2009 (UTC)
2009 hadrosaur chewing study
- I think with any article (media or not) there is a possibility of inaccuracies; that's why we check it with other sources, which is what I did in this Leonardo case. But I respect your opinion. I guess we'll just see where the AFD goes. — Hunter Kahn (c) 17:23, 5 July 2009 (UTC)
DYK for Gallardosaurus
On DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.
Wizardman 08:51, 10 July 2009 (UTC)
HerrerasaurusHey J,
After tomorrow, I am going on a 10-day wikibreak out of state, and may not have a ton of internet access. With the assistance of a lot of folks (including you... thanks, BTW) Herrerasaurus made it to FA, but there are still grammar adjustments that an editor wants to make. Can you take a look? I'm worried I won't be able to devote (much/any) time to genuine concerns over clarity. Firsfron of Ronchester 01:39, 30 July 2009 (UTC)
Carniadactylus.
Loch Ness Monster
- I think s/he’s almost figured out what was needed. Now, if only s/he could figure out how to enter citations fully … — SpikeToronto (talk) 17:21, 14 September 2009 (UTC)
- Well, it looks like it's taken care of, which goes on the positive side in my book. Thank you for the help! J. Spencer (talk) 03:09, 15 September 2009 (UTC)
Those hadrosaurs sure liked to eat, huh?
The Original Barnstar
For substantial additions to the Hadrosaur diet article, I salute you! Abyssal (talk) 03:55, 4 October 2009 (UTC)
Fruitadens
ITN for Fruitadens
On 22 October 2009, In the news was updated with a news item that involved the article Fruitadens, which you substantially updated. If you know of another interesting news item involving a recently created or updated article, then please suggest it on the candidates page.
--BorgQueen (talk) 16:32, 22 October 2009 (UTC)
RajasaurusHi!Spencer,
Congratulations for the GA upgarde of the artcile. Also thanks.--Nvvchar (talk) 18:34, 22 October 2009 (UTC)
Eld's DeerHi! Spencer,
Thanks for the message regarding
Eld's Deer was posted by me on DYK quite some months back and accepted. Since you are an expert in Fauna, will you please advice me if I should post it for GA upgrade. Thanks.--Nvvchar (talk) 02:04, 23 October 2009 (UTC)]
Re: Rajasaurus ga-rev
New find of Dinosaurs nestling ground in IndiaHi! Spencer,
A few days back I had read the above news item in several news papers in India. I have prepared a short write up on the same for any suitable insertion in the Portal or News item. Please see here
User:Nvvchar/sandbox/Ashokan Edicts (Delhi). You may kndly edit it suitably and if it has not appeared on the News page of WP you may consider posting it as a joint news item. Thanks.--Nvvchar (talk) 05:16, 28 October 2009 (UTC)]
Ceratonykus
ScienceDirectHi J,
Do you have access to ScienceDirect? I don't want to pay $31.50 for a paper which discusses "Teleocrater", especially when I don't know how detailed the portion on "Teleocrater" is. The cladogram from their analysis is viewable here, but that doesn't give me much to work with. I figured you being you, you might subscribe to their (rather expensive) service. If not, I'll just leave "Teleo" as he is for now. Firsfron of Ronchester 04:09, 12 November 2009 (UTC)
- Thanks J. As it turns out, a reference librarian I work with has access to the paper, so I now have it. Thanks again for offering. Take care, Firsfron of Ronchester 00:25, 13 November 2009 (UTC)
"Name"?
I know the scientific name should type in Name. But i see lots of scientific name in wikipedia were type in "Name". Why?
Is that official rules that Nomen nudum, Nomen oblitum, Nomen dubium should type in "Name"? or it is just a wikipedia rules? User:Devilfish1962 01:43, 26 Nov. 2009 (UTC)
96.239.237.62Hi, Firs;
I noticed you reverted
Bayosaurus". Having fixed a string of their edits this morning, I am 99% certain that this is the latest version of an editor who was recently blocked at 96.242.198.33 (talk · contribs) for inserting false dates, locations, and other information to paleo articles, and false episodes and voice actors to television shows. Something to keep an eye on, I suppose. J. Spencer (talk) 16:21, 28 November 2009 (UTC)]
- Hi J. Thanks. I wasn't aware of that. Something else to watch out for is this. Firsfron of Ronchester 17:07, 28 November 2009 (UTC)
ThescelosaurusHey J,
It looks like the Hungarian version of Thescelosaurus has become a FA! You're making a difference, even in languages you don't speak. :) (At least, I assume you don't speak Hungarian...) Firsfron of Ronchester 05:52, 30 November 2009 (UTC)
- That's a really weird discovery. I have the 2008 archosauriform histology study at work (I left it on my desk and I'm at home now), and they still treated "Teleocrater" as if it wasn't described. Despite being undescribed, the 2008 study, too, did give a lot of detail (about half a page, as I recall), as well as some illustrations. How does something remain "undescribed" when there's that much detail? I'll take another look tomorrow, but I'm pretty sure the '08 study didn't mention a specific epithet (or I would definitely have mentioned it in the article), and it certainly didn't mention "Thecodontosaurus" alophos or alphos. Firsfron of Ronchester 05:22, 1 December 2009 (UTC)
An idea I wanted to run by you
- I'm glad you like the idea. I doubt Naish and the gang would get too involved, but where the two projects overlap, they may be willing to help. I'm gonna do some more brain storming, maybe a rough draft or two and then send the Dinolist a message. Abyssal (talk) 00:28, 3 December 2009 (UTC)
DYK for Stegomosuchus
On DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.
Materialscientist (talk) 11:44, 3 December 2009 (UTC)
Category:Cretaceous dinosaursHello J. Spencer, I have an advise about Category of Dinosaurs. At present, there are 56 articles in Category:Triassic dinosaurs, 245 articles in Category:Jurassic dinosaurs, and 617 articles in Category:Cretaceous dinosaurs.
However, Cretaceous is around 80 million years long, almost equaled to Late Triassic adding Jurassic. Besides, the Lower Cretaceous Dinosaurs group and Upper Cretaceous Dinosaurs group have obvious differences. My advise is that 「Category:Cretaceous dinosaurs」 can be divided into 「Category:Lower Cretaceous dinosaurs」 and 「Category:Upper Cretaceous dinosaurs」.
Also, I have a question about Dinosaurs in Pakistan. There seveal Dinosaurs found in Pakistan, such as:
Balochisaurus. My question is that whether Pakistan was a part of Indian-Madagascar in Cretaceous, or just a part of Asia continent. If Pakistan was a part of Indian-Madagascar, maybe the above articles should be moved into Category:Dinosaurs of India and Madagascar
hoseumou(talk) 13:59, 12 December 2009 (UTC)
Hadrosaur bipedality
- Fair enough, although I still think it shouldn't be included in the Jurassic Park article for two reasons: the work is unpublished; and perhaps more importantly, it's a bit unfair to call the JP people on it when it was perfectly legitimate to have bipedal running hadrosaurs in the 1990s. I think the page should stick to things that were known to be inaccurate or questionable at the time of production, like sizes and creative embellishments (intelligence, pretty much anything to do with Dilophosaurus, etc.). J. Spencer (talk) 04:39, 7 January 2010 (UTC)
Service awards proposal
Hello, J. Spencer/Archive 3! I noticed you display a service award, and would like to invite you to join the discussion over a proposed revamping of the awards.
If you have any opinions on the proposal, please participate in the discussion. Thanks! — the Man in Question (in question) 04:14, 8 January 2010 (UTC)
Kinkonychelys.
- Thank you very much! Oh no! It's not here!!! (talk) 08:00, 12 January 2010 (UTC)
- Hi again! Following your suggestions, I've gotten the page's main content up to 1227 characters, but of course, it still falls short of the DYK requirement by nearly 300 characters. The only information I can see in the paper about the genus that can still be included is the physical descriptions of the different specimens, and personal experience tells me I'm not too handy when it comes to understanding all of the scientific words used in these descriptions. I really want this article to become a DYK article, though, and I've already seen a few facts in what's been included that might "impress the judges" substantially for inclusion in a DYK update. If it's no trouble, and if any of that information is notable for inclusion in the article, could you please help with adding it in? That would be very much appreciated! Oh no! It's not here!!! (talk) 09:58, 12 January 2010 (UTC)
- Thanks again! Oh no! It's not here!!! (talk) 23:05, 12 January 2010 (UTC)
- Thanks a million, J. Spencer!!! Oh no! It's not here!!! (talk) 00:27, 13 January 2010 (UTC)
Talk:Dinosaur archiving
Deinonychus
- Thank you! I'm not actually very familiar with IPA, but people who are set up the templates on the dinosaur articles, and since this one's been stable for a long time, I figured it was probably a gag or a test edit. J. Spencer (talk) 00:50, 21 January 2010 (UTC)
- I cannot read IPA either - I merely "sounded it out", as you might phrase it. ;) -RadicalOne•Contact Me•Chase My Tail 02:44, 21 January 2010 (UTC)
WikiProject Dinosaurs in the Signpost
Redirects and categories
- Well, it doesn't really bother me either way; it just looked funny having it on a redirect. Species of Psittacosaurus
- I added comments o how to improve the article. GamerPro64 (talk) 01:59, 5 February 2010 (UTC)]
- I sorry to bother you but did you have me give suggestions to improve the article so you can improve the it or for someone else who would want to? GamerPro64 (talk) 23:18, 6 February 2010 (UTC).
- Thank you, J. Spencer!!! Oh no! It's not here!!! (talk) 23:39, 7 February 2010 (UTC)
Reply
Rhabdognathus.
- Okay then. Thank you for the links! Oh no! It's not here!!! (talk) 07:25, 2 March 2010 (UTC)
Linheraptor.
- Thanks! Oh no! It's not here!!! (talk) 02:31, 21 March 2010 (UTC)
Guanlong imageHello,
I've uploaded some images yesterday and put them with some articles.
You said that my images weren't the kind that you're looking for.
Is this one a bit better?
Guanlong wucaii Kind regards from 82.169.6.135 (talk) 13:45, 1 April 2010 (UTC) or better known as Joerim on the Dutch Wikipedia.
Welcome back
Re: Penghusuchus
Brachi and Giraffatitan
- I am torn between keeping a tidy list at the bottom and placing them at first use. I guess the latter is simply more common, and also easier to work with once the text doesn't change much anymore. However, writing the Plateosaurus article showed me that for a total re-write a list at the end would have been better - I spent lots of time searching through the editor. So I guess I'll keep the alphabetical list, and once the text is ready for the main page I'll place the citation at the first use. HMallison (talk) 06:08, 12 May 2010 (UTC)
You're quite right to prod me - however, I must point to the sauropoda re-write, which is devloping into a physiology of dinosaurs update.... I had some rough weeks, work and kids' health wise, but hope to contribute the missing data within the next few days. Then the text will need a thorough massage - was that you vounteering??? ;) HMallison (talk) 06:45, 15 June 2010 (UTC)
- Give me a day or two more, and I'll have a rough structure ready. Then we should talk about it - may or may not be best to use your structure. HMallison (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 15:57, 16 June 2010 (UTC).
If you're into sauropods....here's a must read for you :) Long, boring, but a "deal-breaker", 'cause it has all you ever need to know and cite (I hope).
http://www3.interscience.wiley.com/cgi-bin/fulltext/123397084/HTMLSTART
PDF here:
http://www3.interscience.wiley.com/cgi-bin/fulltext/123397084/PDFSTART
HMallison (talk) 23:35, 16 May 2010 (UTC)
- well, it took me three years to understand it all - but that did involve the research, too ;) Aachenosaurus
- Dunno. I've gone ahead and semi-protected for a month. We'll see if it deters this fellow or fellows. Only the pages listed at Wikipedia:Pending changes/Testing are to be flagged for pending changes. Firsfron of Ronchester 04:10, 9 July 2010 (UTC)
Family treeHi, I'm from the Dutch Wikipedia. Because I want an article to be finished tommorow (I'm going on holliday) I needed help from someone quikly, so I come to you. Maybe you still know me from the illustration of the Guanlong. Here's the problem:
<font color="white">unnamed
<font color="white">unnamed
<font color="white">unnamed
Champsosauridae
<font color="white">unnamed
familie Simoedosauridae
<font color="white">unnamed
?
Champsosauridae
I've got two family trees. The upper one is good, but in front of it there has to be "familie Simoedosauridae", like with the second one. Can you help me, please? Kind regards from 82.169.6.135 (talk) 19:48, 14 July 2010 (UTC) or Joerim, as I'm known at the Dutch Wikipedia.
- Thank you very much! Only one thing, what mistake did I make when making one of these family trees? Kind regards from 82.169.6.135 (talk) 07:35, 15 July 2010 (UTC) or Joerim
Talkback
Concavenator imageHi, I uploaded an image to Concavenator but it was removed due to it not being anatomically rigorous. I did a new one, which is here http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Conc2.png I used this image http://images.nationalgeographic.com/wpf/media-live/photos/000/257/cache/humpback-dinosaur-life-reconstruction_25710_600x450.jpg as a model, but I don't know if mine is yet fit to be used in the article. Any help on how are images judged would be very appreciated (I also posted all this on the article's talk page but I don't know if it will get much attention there).
thank you very much
Nestor db (talk) 18:44, 10 September 2010 (UTC)
Parks ref
-
Congrats, J
- Thanks! J. Spencer (talk) 02:37, 28 September 2008 (UTC)
- Dude, I totally saw that article the other day. Was that you that was quoted in the article, J. Spence? Abyssal (talk) 04:36, 28 September 2008 (UTC)
- 'Tis (this is a nom de wiki ;) ). J. Spencer (talk) 14:50, 28 September 2008 (UTC)
- I had no idea you were involved in such awesomeness. I envy the hell out of you.Abyssal (talk) 15:48, 28 September 2008 (UTC)
- Thank you! I'm a bit surprised we haven't had IPs adding stuff from the press releases or documentary yet. J. Spencer (talk) 21:27, 28 September 2008 (UTC)
- Well, Leonardo isn't a "terrifying meat-eater related to T. rex", so don't hold your breath. I guess I could log in as an IP and randomly add some stuff in, if it makes you feel any better... ;) Firsfron of Ronchester 22:43, 28 September 2008 (UTC)
- Nah, it's no biggie. Eventually we got the lost and found Royal Ontario Barosaurus story, so this one should creep in at some point. The exhibit opening in Houston was pushed back a week because of Hurricane Ike, too. J. Spencer (talk) 22:51, 28 September 2008 (UTC)
Notice
- Dude, I totally saw that article the other day. Was that you that was quoted in the article, J. Spence? Abyssal (talk) 04:36, 28 September 2008 (UTC)
- 'Tis (this is a nom de wiki ;) ). J. Spencer (talk) 14:50, 28 September 2008 (UTC)
- I had no idea you were involved in such awesomeness. I envy the hell out of you.Abyssal (talk) 15:48, 28 September 2008 (UTC)
- Thank you! I'm a bit surprised we haven't had IPs adding stuff from the press releases or documentary yet. J. Spencer (talk) 21:27, 28 September 2008 (UTC)
- Well, Leonardo isn't a "terrifying meat-eater related to T. rex", so don't hold your breath. I guess I could log in as an IP and randomly add some stuff in, if it makes you feel any better... ;) Firsfron of Ronchester 22:43, 28 September 2008 (UTC)
- Nah, it's no biggie. Eventually we got the lost and found Royal Ontario Barosaurus story, so this one should creep in at some point. The exhibit opening in Houston was pushed back a week because of Hurricane Ike, too. J. Spencer (talk) 22:51, 28 September 2008 (UTC)
- Well, Leonardo isn't a "terrifying meat-eater related to T. rex", so don't hold your breath. I guess I could log in as an IP and randomly add some stuff in, if it makes you feel any better... ;) Firsfron of Ronchester 22:43, 28 September 2008 (UTC)
- Thank you! I'm a bit surprised we haven't had IPs adding stuff from the press releases or documentary yet. J. Spencer (talk) 21:27, 28 September 2008 (UTC)
- I had no idea you were involved in such awesomeness. I envy the hell out of you.Abyssal (talk) 15:48, 28 September 2008 (UTC)
- 'Tis (this is a nom de wiki ;) ). J. Spencer (talk) 14:50, 28 September 2008 (UTC)
Notice
 | {{{1}}} |
Cite journal template changes
GA of Cultural depictions of dinosaurs
Albertonykus
Irano-Afgan
Hello, Cyrus111;
I'm sorry, but I'm not familiar enough with the topic to comment on sources. I just periodically disambiguate the term morphology, and Irano-Afghan came up in one of my earlier sweeps. I have fixed another wikilink for the article, though. If a source is authoritative, it should be used, although for basic information I would probably stick to the early 20th century anthropologists instead of modern websites. J. Spencer (talk) 16:22, 9 November 2008 (UTC)
Hi, well 2 sources are from coon the other from shool of Athens both from 20th century, so keep them??? I like how it unifies people and creates affinity and learns about history the problem is the texts that are put in the one from school of Athens where it has been modified, and also there is the text from Mr. Gregor. I should probably get more opinions on this matter so to reach a consensus Cyrus111 (talk) 16:59, 11 November 2008 (UTC)
Dinosaur Park Formation
My picsHey J. Spenser on the Abelisaurus page I put those pictures up. I am wondering if there are Dinosaurs that have had most of their body discovered can I make a size comparison? Nrg800 (talk)
Thanks that makes more sense. But is that diagram that I did for the fossil finds okay?
Nrg800 (talk) 06:33, 21 November 2008 (UTC)
Thank you alot for that Commons link I better get to work making a new one XD Nrg800 (talk) 07:30, 26 November 2008 (UTC)
Thanks
Azhdarch cat
Desert extinctness
Perfect!! Keep up the great work The Bald One White cat 18:45, 14 December 2008 (UTC)
Talk: List of dinosaurs
Stego distro
DYK for Peloroplites
On 24 December, 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Peloroplites, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.
BorgQueen (talk) 07:37, 24 December 2008 (UTC)
WP:DABS and 718 Bot
- Done! talk) 16:07, 17 January 2009 (UTC)]
Argentinosaurus
Pterosaurs format
- Great! :) Abyssal (talk) 00:15, 21 January 2009 (UTC)
- I tweaked the Q-Z section again so that it should look better on bigger monitors and/or higher resolutions. I haven't had a chance to look at it on my home monitor (at school now), so I thought I'd try to get some extra eyes on this until I can. Does it look any different/better/worse? Abyssal (talk) 16:08, 21 January 2009 (UTC)
- Thanks! That's what it should look like; it's what I see too. However, on the really large monitor's at my uni it actually looks wider, whereas the previous version left a big ugly gap. It looks a smidgen worse today on my monitor (and yours apparently) but it looks a heapload better that way on the monitors at school, and since people at schools form a large block of our viewers I think the tradeoff is justifiable. :) Abyssal (talk) 04:24, 22 January 2009 (UTC)
To J. Spencer
You edited what I said about Pterodactyls. While everything about them eating human babies was crap, Pterodactyl Awareness Month does exist. I have seen T-Shirts and calenders. Please revert the article. -Sabotage2595
Edmontosaurus
DYK for Akanthosuchus
On February 14, 2009, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Akanthosuchus, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.
--Dravecky (talk) 04:22, 14 February 2009 (UTC)
Birds and dinosaurs
- Yeah, every so often some well-intentioned type comes along and removes "non-avian" from a dinosaur article. It beats the incredible expanding theropods and the cartoon cameo edits. J. Spencer (talk) 23:35, 25 February 2009 (UTC)
Barnstar
The Original Barnstar
For all-around good work, I award J. Spencer this Barnstar. Keep it up!--ragesoss (talk) 00:22, 26 February 2009 (UTC)
No lapsus calami in poposauridae?
Thanks
Dibothrosuchus
- Done! talk) 19:49, 7 March 2009 (UTC)
DYK for Miragaia (dinosaur)
On Miragaia (dinosaur), which you recently nominated. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.
Royalbroil 02:11, 6 March 2009 (UTC)
Edmontosaurus
DYK for Phyllodontosuchus
On March 9, 2009, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Phyllodontosuchus, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.
Shubinator (talk) 00:23, 9 March 2009 (UTC)
DYK for Dibothrosuchus
On March 12, 2009, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Dibothrosuchus, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.
Congratulations! PeterSymonds (talk) 22:13, 12 March 2009 (UTC)
Edmontosaurus
The entire article needs its prose reviewed; I merely listed items from the lead for starters. Regarding the use of animal: it's good to state the obvious, it's an easy-to-grasp non-jargon-y word, and it saves you from having to say the animal's name or "it" a lot. 05:01, 17 March 2009 (UTC)
DYK
Argentinosaurus againHello, I search for help about Argentinosaurus again. It seems that there are three papers about Argentinosaurus in 90s, such as:
- Appenzeller, T. 1994. Argentine dinos vie for heavyweight titles. Science 266, 1805.
- Paul, G.S. 1994. Is Garden Park home to the world’s largest known land animal? Garden Park Paleontology Society 4, 5.
- Paul, G.S. 1997. Dinosaur models: the good, the bad, and using them to estimate the mass of dinosaurs. In Wolberg, D.L., Stump, E. and Rosenberg, G.D. (eds), DinoFest International Proceedings, pp
But i can't find these papers in internet. Can you search these papers, and find out the length and weight of Argentinosaurus in these papers?
I'll be very thankful if you can help me, thanks. hoseumou 08:40, 28 March 2009 (UTC)
- Thanks you for your answer. But i have a question, it seems that [Early reconstructions estimated...] directly comes from Dinosaur Mailing List. Is that techniquely enough to be a reference? Finally, I have to say I very admired your dinosaur article, such as Edmontosaurus. :) hoseumou 07:43, 31 March 2009 (UTC)
QuinceratopsHi, Firs;
You'd better nail the article, too. J. Spencer (talk) 18:02, 24 May 2009 (UTC)
- Thanks J. The article was still redlinked when I removed it from Ceratopsidae. I'm not sure what to do about the image on Commons, File:Quinceratops 03869.JPG. Probably someone should be notified. Firsfron of Ronchester 18:15, 24 May 2009 (UTC)
- Moab man can probably be salvaged, given time (and a little TNT). Firsfron of Ronchester 19:33, 24 May 2009 (UTC)]
Piveteausaurus
RajasaurusHi! Spencer,
The following are quoated from Rjanag's talk page.
May I request you to please revisit the above article to review the tag, since another expert on the subject has edited it?--Nvvchar (talk) 09:46, 16 May 2009 (UTC)
- Hey Nvvchar, sorry it's taken me so long to get back. Anyway, it would probably be better to ask J. Spencer about this, since he's the one who did the rewriting and he's more familiar with the content. I'm sure that if he went through it it's probably all fine now, but I'd feel more comfortable letting him remove the tag (since he knows what the state of the article is, whereas all I can do right now is assume—and I'd rather not go through one sentence at a time, as JSpencer probably already has). rʨanaɢ talk/contribs 21:18, 30 May 2009 (UTC)
Since, as a well known expert in the field, you have edited the version of Rajasaurus after Rjanag,s tag, which was earlier also edited by a group of users of the
Dinosaurs Portal with extensive experience in this field, would you kindly consider removing the tag on the article? I am in the process of getting some pictures of Rajasuarus model erected in Lucknow India posted on the article. Thanks--Nvvchar (talk) 02:58, 31 May 2009 (UTC)]
- Thank you very much. I hope I will have opportunities in the near future on the ]
- Can you nominate this article for GA status since it is already assessed as "B" class and many of
Dinosaurs portal members like yourself and others have put in a lot of effort to improve it?--Nvvchar (talk) 15:37, 1 August 2009 (UTC)]
Heterodontosauridae
- I highly doubt that somebody would consider it OR, but it's better to be safe than sorry. Thanks for contacting the other editor, and hopefully a source can be found for it. --Happy editing! Nehrams2020 (talk • contrib) 05:04, 2 June 2009 (UTC)
Piveteau's brain probably was bigger than a walnut
- I think it's great. I think he was a scientific illustrator also; although many scientists at the time did their own illustrations, he was known for his. I tried to confirm this information to include in the article but found nothing specific. The illustrations can be included in both the dinosaur and bio articles, if you can get decent copies. If you don't get decent copies, and I have time, I can resketch at least the most important one of them if they're out of copyright. --69.226.103.13 (talk) 22:56, 2 June 2009 (UTC)
User 173.35.129.119 issues....I just undid a half dozen bad edits of his...again. He just got the temporary ban lifted and is right back at it..
it's gotten to where someone needs to get a perma ban put on that IP address. It's vandalism at this point. I don't know if you have that ability or can get in contact with someone who does, but it's really time. Forescore68 (talk) 16:15, 13 June 2009 (UTC)
- Oh, and thanks for cleaning up my Chuandongocoelurus mess...I did it in a huffy. Glad I don't lose points in this forum for being hasty and dumb...Forescore68 (talk) 02:33, 18 June 2009 (UTC)
Italictitle templateHi, Firs;
I just found out something useful about the italictitle template: I already knew that if it is put at the top, it prevents the uppermost [edit] bracket from showing. However, if it's put below the taxobox, as Bob did at Pteranodon and I just did with Allosaurus, it doesn't interfere. I don't know if this has editing drawbacks, but it's very good to know we can get back the edit bracket for the lede section, especially for ginormous articles. J. Spencer (talk) 01:35, 17 June 2009 (UTC)
- Hey!
- I didn't realize it prevents the uppermost edit link from showing. We might want to bring this up at tree of life. Either this should be fixed through the template itself, or I could possibly AWB it; I think there is a pretty easy way to delete the template name while substituting the same template name immediately below the taxobox. If this is acceptable to you (and everyone else who works in these areas), I could work on this tomorrow. Thanks for catching this. Firsfron of Ronchester 06:17, 17 June 2009 (UTC).
- P.S. Also, I'd like to make sure I interpreted everything I've included in the article correctly. Thanks in advance! Mess around with the guy in shades all you like - don't mess around with the girl in gloves! (talk) 08:28, 26 June 2009 (UTC)
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template. Mess around with the guy in shades all you like - don't mess around with the girl in gloves! (talk) 00:41, 27 June 2009 (UTC)
- I reveiewed the DYK hook for this, and everything looks fine except that I had some minor wording changes to the hook. If you are okay with those changes, please indicate so in its DYK submission at Template talk:Did You Know#Gallardosaurus and I can approve the hook. Rlendog (talk) 02:17, 8 July 2009 (UTC)]
New hoaxHi, Firs;
Here's a new one to nail, if it's still here by the time you read this: Rorasaurus. J. Spencer (talk) 13:19, 1 July 2009 (UTC)
(I'd watch Roarasaurus too, as they may try to recreate it.) J. Spencer (talk) 13:27, 1 July 2009 (UTC)
- Thanks. I've just nuked it. Firsfron of Ronchester 13:53, 1 July 2009 (UTC)
- Yeah, I'm going to start re-inquiring about the possibility of fixing WP:DABS. As you say, if some random IP hadn't added the name to the List, you wouldn't have noticed it. That's not good. Firsfron of Ronchester 00:47, 2 July 2009 (UTC)
- It's true: DABS was just one way of catching potential hoaxes (or very short new articles that editors sometimes create), but it was nice to have that option. Firsfron of Ronchester 04:32, 2 July 2009 (UTC)
- I had no idea it would be that easy. Request, and within an hour, voila! Firsfron of Ronchester 03:21, 13 July 2009 (UTC)
Thanks...
ITN for Australovenator, Diamantinasaurus and Wintonotitan
On In the news candidates page.
--BorgQueen (talk) 20:14, 4 July 2009 (UTC)
2009 hadrosaur chewing study
- I think with any article (media or not) there is a possibility of inaccuracies; that's why we check it with other sources, which is what I did in this Leonardo case. But I respect your opinion. I guess we'll just see where the AFD goes. — Hunter Kahn (c) 17:23, 5 July 2009 (UTC)
DYK for Gallardosaurus
On DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.
Wizardman 08:51, 10 July 2009 (UTC)
HerrerasaurusHey J,
After tomorrow, I am going on a 10-day wikibreak out of state, and may not have a ton of internet access. With the assistance of a lot of folks (including you... thanks, BTW) Herrerasaurus made it to FA, but there are still grammar adjustments that an editor wants to make. Can you take a look? I'm worried I won't be able to devote (much/any) time to genuine concerns over clarity. Firsfron of Ronchester 01:39, 30 July 2009 (UTC)
Carniadactylus.
Loch Ness Monster
- I think s/he’s almost figured out what was needed. Now, if only s/he could figure out how to enter citations fully … — SpikeToronto (talk) 17:21, 14 September 2009 (UTC)
- Well, it looks like it's taken care of, which goes on the positive side in my book. Thank you for the help! J. Spencer (talk) 03:09, 15 September 2009 (UTC)
Those hadrosaurs sure liked to eat, huh?
The Original Barnstar
For substantial additions to the Hadrosaur diet article, I salute you! Abyssal (talk) 03:55, 4 October 2009 (UTC)
Fruitadens
ITN for Fruitadens
On 22 October 2009, In the news was updated with a news item that involved the article Fruitadens, which you substantially updated. If you know of another interesting news item involving a recently created or updated article, then please suggest it on the candidates page.
--BorgQueen (talk) 16:32, 22 October 2009 (UTC)
RajasaurusHi!Spencer,
Congratulations for the GA upgarde of the artcile. Also thanks.--Nvvchar (talk) 18:34, 22 October 2009 (UTC)
Eld's DeerHi! Spencer,
Thanks for the message regarding
Eld's Deer was posted by me on DYK quite some months back and accepted. Since you are an expert in Fauna, will you please advice me if I should post it for GA upgrade. Thanks.--Nvvchar (talk) 02:04, 23 October 2009 (UTC)]
Re: Rajasaurus ga-rev
New find of Dinosaurs nestling ground in IndiaHi! Spencer,
A few days back I had read the above news item in several news papers in India. I have prepared a short write up on the same for any suitable insertion in the Portal or News item. Please see here
User:Nvvchar/sandbox/Ashokan Edicts (Delhi). You may kndly edit it suitably and if it has not appeared on the News page of WP you may consider posting it as a joint news item. Thanks.--Nvvchar (talk) 05:16, 28 October 2009 (UTC)]
Ceratonykus
ScienceDirectHi J,
Do you have access to ScienceDirect? I don't want to pay $31.50 for a paper which discusses "Teleocrater", especially when I don't know how detailed the portion on "Teleocrater" is. The cladogram from their analysis is viewable here, but that doesn't give me much to work with. I figured you being you, you might subscribe to their (rather expensive) service. If not, I'll just leave "Teleo" as he is for now. Firsfron of Ronchester 04:09, 12 November 2009 (UTC)
- Thanks J. As it turns out, a reference librarian I work with has access to the paper, so I now have it. Thanks again for offering. Take care, Firsfron of Ronchester 00:25, 13 November 2009 (UTC)
"Name"?
I know the scientific name should type in Name. But i see lots of scientific name in wikipedia were type in "Name". Why?
Is that official rules that Nomen nudum, Nomen oblitum, Nomen dubium should type in "Name"? or it is just a wikipedia rules? User:Devilfish1962 01:43, 26 Nov. 2009 (UTC)
96.239.237.62Hi, Firs;
I noticed you reverted
Bayosaurus". Having fixed a string of their edits this morning, I am 99% certain that this is the latest version of an editor who was recently blocked at 96.242.198.33 (talk · contribs) for inserting false dates, locations, and other information to paleo articles, and false episodes and voice actors to television shows. Something to keep an eye on, I suppose. J. Spencer (talk) 16:21, 28 November 2009 (UTC)]
- Hi J. Thanks. I wasn't aware of that. Something else to watch out for is this. Firsfron of Ronchester 17:07, 28 November 2009 (UTC)
ThescelosaurusHey J,
It looks like the Hungarian version of Thescelosaurus has become a FA! You're making a difference, even in languages you don't speak. :) (At least, I assume you don't speak Hungarian...) Firsfron of Ronchester 05:52, 30 November 2009 (UTC)
- That's a really weird discovery. I have the 2008 archosauriform histology study at work (I left it on my desk and I'm at home now), and they still treated "Teleocrater" as if it wasn't described. Despite being undescribed, the 2008 study, too, did give a lot of detail (about half a page, as I recall), as well as some illustrations. How does something remain "undescribed" when there's that much detail? I'll take another look tomorrow, but I'm pretty sure the '08 study didn't mention a specific epithet (or I would definitely have mentioned it in the article), and it certainly didn't mention "Thecodontosaurus" alophos or alphos. Firsfron of Ronchester 05:22, 1 December 2009 (UTC)
An idea I wanted to run by you
- I'm glad you like the idea. I doubt Naish and the gang would get too involved, but where the two projects overlap, they may be willing to help. I'm gonna do some more brain storming, maybe a rough draft or two and then send the Dinolist a message. Abyssal (talk) 00:28, 3 December 2009 (UTC)
DYK for Stegomosuchus
On DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.
Materialscientist (talk) 11:44, 3 December 2009 (UTC)
Category:Cretaceous dinosaursHello J. Spencer, I have an advise about Category of Dinosaurs. At present, there are 56 articles in Category:Triassic dinosaurs, 245 articles in Category:Jurassic dinosaurs, and 617 articles in Category:Cretaceous dinosaurs.
However, Cretaceous is around 80 million years long, almost equaled to Late Triassic adding Jurassic. Besides, the Lower Cretaceous Dinosaurs group and Upper Cretaceous Dinosaurs group have obvious differences. My advise is that 「Category:Cretaceous dinosaurs」 can be divided into 「Category:Lower Cretaceous dinosaurs」 and 「Category:Upper Cretaceous dinosaurs」.
Also, I have a question about Dinosaurs in Pakistan. There seveal Dinosaurs found in Pakistan, such as:
Balochisaurus. My question is that whether Pakistan was a part of Indian-Madagascar in Cretaceous, or just a part of Asia continent. If Pakistan was a part of Indian-Madagascar, maybe the above articles should be moved into Category:Dinosaurs of India and Madagascar
hoseumou(talk) 13:59, 12 December 2009 (UTC)
Hadrosaur bipedality
- Fair enough, although I still think it shouldn't be included in the Jurassic Park article for two reasons: the work is unpublished; and perhaps more importantly, it's a bit unfair to call the JP people on it when it was perfectly legitimate to have bipedal running hadrosaurs in the 1990s. I think the page should stick to things that were known to be inaccurate or questionable at the time of production, like sizes and creative embellishments (intelligence, pretty much anything to do with Dilophosaurus, etc.). J. Spencer (talk) 04:39, 7 January 2010 (UTC)
Service awards proposal
Hello, J. Spencer/Archive 3! I noticed you display a service award, and would like to invite you to join the discussion over a proposed revamping of the awards.
If you have any opinions on the proposal, please participate in the discussion. Thanks! — the Man in Question (in question) 04:14, 8 January 2010 (UTC)
Kinkonychelys.
- Thank you very much! Oh no! It's not here!!! (talk) 08:00, 12 January 2010 (UTC)
- Hi again! Following your suggestions, I've gotten the page's main content up to 1227 characters, but of course, it still falls short of the DYK requirement by nearly 300 characters. The only information I can see in the paper about the genus that can still be included is the physical descriptions of the different specimens, and personal experience tells me I'm not too handy when it comes to understanding all of the scientific words used in these descriptions. I really want this article to become a DYK article, though, and I've already seen a few facts in what's been included that might "impress the judges" substantially for inclusion in a DYK update. If it's no trouble, and if any of that information is notable for inclusion in the article, could you please help with adding it in? That would be very much appreciated! Oh no! It's not here!!! (talk) 09:58, 12 January 2010 (UTC)
- Thanks again! Oh no! It's not here!!! (talk) 23:05, 12 January 2010 (UTC)
- Thanks a million, J. Spencer!!! Oh no! It's not here!!! (talk) 00:27, 13 January 2010 (UTC)
Talk:Dinosaur archiving
Deinonychus
- Thank you! I'm not actually very familiar with IPA, but people who are set up the templates on the dinosaur articles, and since this one's been stable for a long time, I figured it was probably a gag or a test edit. J. Spencer (talk) 00:50, 21 January 2010 (UTC)
- I cannot read IPA either - I merely "sounded it out", as you might phrase it. ;) -RadicalOne•Contact Me•Chase My Tail 02:44, 21 January 2010 (UTC)
WikiProject Dinosaurs in the Signpost
Redirects and categories
- Well, it doesn't really bother me either way; it just looked funny having it on a redirect. Species of Psittacosaurus
- I added comments o how to improve the article. GamerPro64 (talk) 01:59, 5 February 2010 (UTC)]
- I sorry to bother you but did you have me give suggestions to improve the article so you can improve the it or for someone else who would want to? GamerPro64 (talk) 23:18, 6 February 2010 (UTC).
- Thank you, J. Spencer!!! Oh no! It's not here!!! (talk) 23:39, 7 February 2010 (UTC)
Reply
Rhabdognathus.
- Okay then. Thank you for the links! Oh no! It's not here!!! (talk) 07:25, 2 March 2010 (UTC)
Linheraptor.
- Thanks! Oh no! It's not here!!! (talk) 02:31, 21 March 2010 (UTC)
Guanlong imageHello,
I've uploaded some images yesterday and put them with some articles.
You said that my images weren't the kind that you're looking for.
Is this one a bit better?
Guanlong wucaii Kind regards from 82.169.6.135 (talk) 13:45, 1 April 2010 (UTC) or better known as Joerim on the Dutch Wikipedia.
Welcome back
Re: Penghusuchus
Brachi and Giraffatitan
- I am torn between keeping a tidy list at the bottom and placing them at first use. I guess the latter is simply more common, and also easier to work with once the text doesn't change much anymore. However, writing the Plateosaurus article showed me that for a total re-write a list at the end would have been better - I spent lots of time searching through the editor. So I guess I'll keep the alphabetical list, and once the text is ready for the main page I'll place the citation at the first use. HMallison (talk) 06:08, 12 May 2010 (UTC)
You're quite right to prod me - however, I must point to the sauropoda re-write, which is devloping into a physiology of dinosaurs update.... I had some rough weeks, work and kids' health wise, but hope to contribute the missing data within the next few days. Then the text will need a thorough massage - was that you vounteering??? ;) HMallison (talk) 06:45, 15 June 2010 (UTC)
- Give me a day or two more, and I'll have a rough structure ready. Then we should talk about it - may or may not be best to use your structure. HMallison (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 15:57, 16 June 2010 (UTC).
If you're into sauropods....here's a must read for you :) Long, boring, but a "deal-breaker", 'cause it has all you ever need to know and cite (I hope).
http://www3.interscience.wiley.com/cgi-bin/fulltext/123397084/HTMLSTART
PDF here:
http://www3.interscience.wiley.com/cgi-bin/fulltext/123397084/PDFSTART
HMallison (talk) 23:35, 16 May 2010 (UTC)
- well, it took me three years to understand it all - but that did involve the research, too ;) Aachenosaurus
- Dunno. I've gone ahead and semi-protected for a month. We'll see if it deters this fellow or fellows. Only the pages listed at Wikipedia:Pending changes/Testing are to be flagged for pending changes. Firsfron of Ronchester 04:10, 9 July 2010 (UTC)
Family treeHi, I'm from the Dutch Wikipedia. Because I want an article to be finished tommorow (I'm going on holliday) I needed help from someone quikly, so I come to you. Maybe you still know me from the illustration of the Guanlong. Here's the problem:
<font color="white">unnamed
<font color="white">unnamed
<font color="white">unnamed
Champsosauridae
<font color="white">unnamed
familie Simoedosauridae
<font color="white">unnamed
?
Champsosauridae
I've got two family trees. The upper one is good, but in front of it there has to be "familie Simoedosauridae", like with the second one. Can you help me, please? Kind regards from 82.169.6.135 (talk) 19:48, 14 July 2010 (UTC) or Joerim, as I'm known at the Dutch Wikipedia.
- Thank you very much! Only one thing, what mistake did I make when making one of these family trees? Kind regards from 82.169.6.135 (talk) 07:35, 15 July 2010 (UTC) or Joerim
Talkback
Concavenator imageHi, I uploaded an image to Concavenator but it was removed due to it not being anatomically rigorous. I did a new one, which is here http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Conc2.png I used this image http://images.nationalgeographic.com/wpf/media-live/photos/000/257/cache/humpback-dinosaur-life-reconstruction_25710_600x450.jpg as a model, but I don't know if mine is yet fit to be used in the article. Any help on how are images judged would be very appreciated (I also posted all this on the article's talk page but I don't know if it will get much attention there).
thank you very much
Nestor db (talk) 18:44, 10 September 2010 (UTC)
Parks ref
-
GA of Cultural depictions of dinosaurs
Albertonykus
Irano-Afgan
Hello, Cyrus111;
I'm sorry, but I'm not familiar enough with the topic to comment on sources. I just periodically disambiguate the term morphology, and Irano-Afghan came up in one of my earlier sweeps. I have fixed another wikilink for the article, though. If a source is authoritative, it should be used, although for basic information I would probably stick to the early 20th century anthropologists instead of modern websites. J. Spencer (talk) 16:22, 9 November 2008 (UTC)
Hi, well 2 sources are from coon the other from shool of Athens both from 20th century, so keep them??? I like how it unifies people and creates affinity and learns about history the problem is the texts that are put in the one from school of Athens where it has been modified, and also there is the text from Mr. Gregor. I should probably get more opinions on this matter so to reach a consensus Cyrus111 (talk) 16:59, 11 November 2008 (UTC)
Dinosaur Park Formation
My picsHey J. Spenser on the Abelisaurus page I put those pictures up. I am wondering if there are Dinosaurs that have had most of their body discovered can I make a size comparison? Nrg800 (talk)
Thanks that makes more sense. But is that diagram that I did for the fossil finds okay?
Nrg800 (talk) 06:33, 21 November 2008 (UTC)
Thank you alot for that Commons link I better get to work making a new one XD Nrg800 (talk) 07:30, 26 November 2008 (UTC)
Thanks
Azhdarch cat
Desert extinctness
Perfect!! Keep up the great work The Bald One White cat 18:45, 14 December 2008 (UTC)
Talk: List of dinosaurs
Stego distro
DYK for Peloroplites
On 24 December, 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Peloroplites, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.
BorgQueen (talk) 07:37, 24 December 2008 (UTC)
WP:DABS and 718 Bot
- Done! talk) 16:07, 17 January 2009 (UTC)]
Argentinosaurus
Pterosaurs format
- Great! :) Abyssal (talk) 00:15, 21 January 2009 (UTC)
- I tweaked the Q-Z section again so that it should look better on bigger monitors and/or higher resolutions. I haven't had a chance to look at it on my home monitor (at school now), so I thought I'd try to get some extra eyes on this until I can. Does it look any different/better/worse? Abyssal (talk) 16:08, 21 January 2009 (UTC)
- Thanks! That's what it should look like; it's what I see too. However, on the really large monitor's at my uni it actually looks wider, whereas the previous version left a big ugly gap. It looks a smidgen worse today on my monitor (and yours apparently) but it looks a heapload better that way on the monitors at school, and since people at schools form a large block of our viewers I think the tradeoff is justifiable. :) Abyssal (talk) 04:24, 22 January 2009 (UTC)
To J. Spencer
You edited what I said about Pterodactyls. While everything about them eating human babies was crap, Pterodactyl Awareness Month does exist. I have seen T-Shirts and calenders. Please revert the article. -Sabotage2595
Edmontosaurus
DYK for Akanthosuchus
On February 14, 2009, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Akanthosuchus, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.
--Dravecky (talk) 04:22, 14 February 2009 (UTC)
Birds and dinosaurs
- Yeah, every so often some well-intentioned type comes along and removes "non-avian" from a dinosaur article. It beats the incredible expanding theropods and the cartoon cameo edits. J. Spencer (talk) 23:35, 25 February 2009 (UTC)
Barnstar
The Original Barnstar
For all-around good work, I award J. Spencer this Barnstar. Keep it up!--ragesoss (talk) 00:22, 26 February 2009 (UTC)
No lapsus calami in poposauridae?
Thanks
Dibothrosuchus
- Done! talk) 19:49, 7 March 2009 (UTC)
DYK for Miragaia (dinosaur)
On Miragaia (dinosaur), which you recently nominated. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.
Royalbroil 02:11, 6 March 2009 (UTC)
Edmontosaurus
DYK for Phyllodontosuchus
On March 9, 2009, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Phyllodontosuchus, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.
Shubinator (talk) 00:23, 9 March 2009 (UTC)
DYK for Dibothrosuchus
On March 12, 2009, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Dibothrosuchus, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.
Congratulations! PeterSymonds (talk) 22:13, 12 March 2009 (UTC)
Edmontosaurus
The entire article needs its prose reviewed; I merely listed items from the lead for starters. Regarding the use of animal: it's good to state the obvious, it's an easy-to-grasp non-jargon-y word, and it saves you from having to say the animal's name or "it" a lot. 05:01, 17 March 2009 (UTC)
DYK
Argentinosaurus againHello, I search for help about Argentinosaurus again. It seems that there are three papers about Argentinosaurus in 90s, such as:
- Appenzeller, T. 1994. Argentine dinos vie for heavyweight titles. Science 266, 1805.
- Paul, G.S. 1994. Is Garden Park home to the world’s largest known land animal? Garden Park Paleontology Society 4, 5.
- Paul, G.S. 1997. Dinosaur models: the good, the bad, and using them to estimate the mass of dinosaurs. In Wolberg, D.L., Stump, E. and Rosenberg, G.D. (eds), DinoFest International Proceedings, pp
But i can't find these papers in internet. Can you search these papers, and find out the length and weight of Argentinosaurus in these papers?
I'll be very thankful if you can help me, thanks. hoseumou 08:40, 28 March 2009 (UTC)
- Thanks you for your answer. But i have a question, it seems that [Early reconstructions estimated...] directly comes from Dinosaur Mailing List. Is that techniquely enough to be a reference? Finally, I have to say I very admired your dinosaur article, such as Edmontosaurus. :) hoseumou 07:43, 31 March 2009 (UTC)
QuinceratopsHi, Firs;
You'd better nail the article, too. J. Spencer (talk) 18:02, 24 May 2009 (UTC)
- Thanks J. The article was still redlinked when I removed it from Ceratopsidae. I'm not sure what to do about the image on Commons, File:Quinceratops 03869.JPG. Probably someone should be notified. Firsfron of Ronchester 18:15, 24 May 2009 (UTC)
- Moab man can probably be salvaged, given time (and a little TNT). Firsfron of Ronchester 19:33, 24 May 2009 (UTC)]
Piveteausaurus
RajasaurusHi! Spencer,
The following are quoated from Rjanag's talk page.
May I request you to please revisit the above article to review the tag, since another expert on the subject has edited it?--Nvvchar (talk) 09:46, 16 May 2009 (UTC)
- Hey Nvvchar, sorry it's taken me so long to get back. Anyway, it would probably be better to ask J. Spencer about this, since he's the one who did the rewriting and he's more familiar with the content. I'm sure that if he went through it it's probably all fine now, but I'd feel more comfortable letting him remove the tag (since he knows what the state of the article is, whereas all I can do right now is assume—and I'd rather not go through one sentence at a time, as JSpencer probably already has). rʨanaɢ talk/contribs 21:18, 30 May 2009 (UTC)
Since, as a well known expert in the field, you have edited the version of Rajasaurus after Rjanag,s tag, which was earlier also edited by a group of users of the
Dinosaurs Portal with extensive experience in this field, would you kindly consider removing the tag on the article? I am in the process of getting some pictures of Rajasuarus model erected in Lucknow India posted on the article. Thanks--Nvvchar (talk) 02:58, 31 May 2009 (UTC)]
- Thank you very much. I hope I will have opportunities in the near future on the ]
- Can you nominate this article for GA status since it is already assessed as "B" class and many of
Dinosaurs portal members like yourself and others have put in a lot of effort to improve it?--Nvvchar (talk) 15:37, 1 August 2009 (UTC)]
Heterodontosauridae
- I highly doubt that somebody would consider it OR, but it's better to be safe than sorry. Thanks for contacting the other editor, and hopefully a source can be found for it. --Happy editing! Nehrams2020 (talk • contrib) 05:04, 2 June 2009 (UTC)
Piveteau's brain probably was bigger than a walnut
- I think it's great. I think he was a scientific illustrator also; although many scientists at the time did their own illustrations, he was known for his. I tried to confirm this information to include in the article but found nothing specific. The illustrations can be included in both the dinosaur and bio articles, if you can get decent copies. If you don't get decent copies, and I have time, I can resketch at least the most important one of them if they're out of copyright. --69.226.103.13 (talk) 22:56, 2 June 2009 (UTC)
User 173.35.129.119 issues....I just undid a half dozen bad edits of his...again. He just got the temporary ban lifted and is right back at it..
it's gotten to where someone needs to get a perma ban put on that IP address. It's vandalism at this point. I don't know if you have that ability or can get in contact with someone who does, but it's really time. Forescore68 (talk) 16:15, 13 June 2009 (UTC)
- Oh, and thanks for cleaning up my Chuandongocoelurus mess...I did it in a huffy. Glad I don't lose points in this forum for being hasty and dumb...Forescore68 (talk) 02:33, 18 June 2009 (UTC)
Italictitle templateHi, Firs;
I just found out something useful about the italictitle template: I already knew that if it is put at the top, it prevents the uppermost [edit] bracket from showing. However, if it's put below the taxobox, as Bob did at Pteranodon and I just did with Allosaurus, it doesn't interfere. I don't know if this has editing drawbacks, but it's very good to know we can get back the edit bracket for the lede section, especially for ginormous articles. J. Spencer (talk) 01:35, 17 June 2009 (UTC)
- Hey!
- I didn't realize it prevents the uppermost edit link from showing. We might want to bring this up at tree of life. Either this should be fixed through the template itself, or I could possibly AWB it; I think there is a pretty easy way to delete the template name while substituting the same template name immediately below the taxobox. If this is acceptable to you (and everyone else who works in these areas), I could work on this tomorrow. Thanks for catching this. Firsfron of Ronchester 06:17, 17 June 2009 (UTC).
- P.S. Also, I'd like to make sure I interpreted everything I've included in the article correctly. Thanks in advance! Mess around with the guy in shades all you like - don't mess around with the girl in gloves! (talk) 08:28, 26 June 2009 (UTC)
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template. Mess around with the guy in shades all you like - don't mess around with the girl in gloves! (talk) 00:41, 27 June 2009 (UTC)
- I reveiewed the DYK hook for this, and everything looks fine except that I had some minor wording changes to the hook. If you are okay with those changes, please indicate so in its DYK submission at Template talk:Did You Know#Gallardosaurus and I can approve the hook. Rlendog (talk) 02:17, 8 July 2009 (UTC)]
New hoaxHi, Firs;
Here's a new one to nail, if it's still here by the time you read this: Rorasaurus. J. Spencer (talk) 13:19, 1 July 2009 (UTC)
(I'd watch Roarasaurus too, as they may try to recreate it.) J. Spencer (talk) 13:27, 1 July 2009 (UTC)
- Thanks. I've just nuked it. Firsfron of Ronchester 13:53, 1 July 2009 (UTC)
- Yeah, I'm going to start re-inquiring about the possibility of fixing WP:DABS. As you say, if some random IP hadn't added the name to the List, you wouldn't have noticed it. That's not good. Firsfron of Ronchester 00:47, 2 July 2009 (UTC)
- It's true: DABS was just one way of catching potential hoaxes (or very short new articles that editors sometimes create), but it was nice to have that option. Firsfron of Ronchester 04:32, 2 July 2009 (UTC)
- I had no idea it would be that easy. Request, and within an hour, voila! Firsfron of Ronchester 03:21, 13 July 2009 (UTC)
Thanks...
ITN for Australovenator, Diamantinasaurus and Wintonotitan
On In the news candidates page.
--BorgQueen (talk) 20:14, 4 July 2009 (UTC)
2009 hadrosaur chewing study
- I think with any article (media or not) there is a possibility of inaccuracies; that's why we check it with other sources, which is what I did in this Leonardo case. But I respect your opinion. I guess we'll just see where the AFD goes. — Hunter Kahn (c) 17:23, 5 July 2009 (UTC)
DYK for Gallardosaurus
On DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.
Wizardman 08:51, 10 July 2009 (UTC)
HerrerasaurusHey J,
After tomorrow, I am going on a 10-day wikibreak out of state, and may not have a ton of internet access. With the assistance of a lot of folks (including you... thanks, BTW) Herrerasaurus made it to FA, but there are still grammar adjustments that an editor wants to make. Can you take a look? I'm worried I won't be able to devote (much/any) time to genuine concerns over clarity. Firsfron of Ronchester 01:39, 30 July 2009 (UTC)
Carniadactylus.
Loch Ness Monster
- I think s/he’s almost figured out what was needed. Now, if only s/he could figure out how to enter citations fully … — SpikeToronto (talk) 17:21, 14 September 2009 (UTC)
- Well, it looks like it's taken care of, which goes on the positive side in my book. Thank you for the help! J. Spencer (talk) 03:09, 15 September 2009 (UTC)
Those hadrosaurs sure liked to eat, huh?
The Original Barnstar
For substantial additions to the Hadrosaur diet article, I salute you! Abyssal (talk) 03:55, 4 October 2009 (UTC)
Fruitadens
ITN for Fruitadens
On 22 October 2009, In the news was updated with a news item that involved the article Fruitadens, which you substantially updated. If you know of another interesting news item involving a recently created or updated article, then please suggest it on the candidates page.
--BorgQueen (talk) 16:32, 22 October 2009 (UTC)
RajasaurusHi!Spencer,
Congratulations for the GA upgarde of the artcile. Also thanks.--Nvvchar (talk) 18:34, 22 October 2009 (UTC)
Eld's DeerHi! Spencer,
Thanks for the message regarding
Eld's Deer was posted by me on DYK quite some months back and accepted. Since you are an expert in Fauna, will you please advice me if I should post it for GA upgrade. Thanks.--Nvvchar (talk) 02:04, 23 October 2009 (UTC)]
Re: Rajasaurus ga-rev
New find of Dinosaurs nestling ground in IndiaHi! Spencer,
A few days back I had read the above news item in several news papers in India. I have prepared a short write up on the same for any suitable insertion in the Portal or News item. Please see here
User:Nvvchar/sandbox/Ashokan Edicts (Delhi). You may kndly edit it suitably and if it has not appeared on the News page of WP you may consider posting it as a joint news item. Thanks.--Nvvchar (talk) 05:16, 28 October 2009 (UTC)]
Ceratonykus
ScienceDirectHi J,
Do you have access to ScienceDirect? I don't want to pay $31.50 for a paper which discusses "Teleocrater", especially when I don't know how detailed the portion on "Teleocrater" is. The cladogram from their analysis is viewable here, but that doesn't give me much to work with. I figured you being you, you might subscribe to their (rather expensive) service. If not, I'll just leave "Teleo" as he is for now. Firsfron of Ronchester 04:09, 12 November 2009 (UTC)
- Thanks J. As it turns out, a reference librarian I work with has access to the paper, so I now have it. Thanks again for offering. Take care, Firsfron of Ronchester 00:25, 13 November 2009 (UTC)
"Name"?
I know the scientific name should type in Name. But i see lots of scientific name in wikipedia were type in "Name". Why?
Is that official rules that Nomen nudum, Nomen oblitum, Nomen dubium should type in "Name"? or it is just a wikipedia rules? User:Devilfish1962 01:43, 26 Nov. 2009 (UTC)
96.239.237.62Hi, Firs;
I noticed you reverted
Bayosaurus". Having fixed a string of their edits this morning, I am 99% certain that this is the latest version of an editor who was recently blocked at 96.242.198.33 (talk · contribs) for inserting false dates, locations, and other information to paleo articles, and false episodes and voice actors to television shows. Something to keep an eye on, I suppose. J. Spencer (talk) 16:21, 28 November 2009 (UTC)]
- Hi J. Thanks. I wasn't aware of that. Something else to watch out for is this. Firsfron of Ronchester 17:07, 28 November 2009 (UTC)
ThescelosaurusHey J,
It looks like the Hungarian version of Thescelosaurus has become a FA! You're making a difference, even in languages you don't speak. :) (At least, I assume you don't speak Hungarian...) Firsfron of Ronchester 05:52, 30 November 2009 (UTC)
- That's a really weird discovery. I have the 2008 archosauriform histology study at work (I left it on my desk and I'm at home now), and they still treated "Teleocrater" as if it wasn't described. Despite being undescribed, the 2008 study, too, did give a lot of detail (about half a page, as I recall), as well as some illustrations. How does something remain "undescribed" when there's that much detail? I'll take another look tomorrow, but I'm pretty sure the '08 study didn't mention a specific epithet (or I would definitely have mentioned it in the article), and it certainly didn't mention "Thecodontosaurus" alophos or alphos. Firsfron of Ronchester 05:22, 1 December 2009 (UTC)
An idea I wanted to run by you
- I'm glad you like the idea. I doubt Naish and the gang would get too involved, but where the two projects overlap, they may be willing to help. I'm gonna do some more brain storming, maybe a rough draft or two and then send the Dinolist a message. Abyssal (talk) 00:28, 3 December 2009 (UTC)
DYK for Stegomosuchus
On DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.
Materialscientist (talk) 11:44, 3 December 2009 (UTC)
Category:Cretaceous dinosaursHello J. Spencer, I have an advise about Category of Dinosaurs. At present, there are 56 articles in Category:Triassic dinosaurs, 245 articles in Category:Jurassic dinosaurs, and 617 articles in Category:Cretaceous dinosaurs.
However, Cretaceous is around 80 million years long, almost equaled to Late Triassic adding Jurassic. Besides, the Lower Cretaceous Dinosaurs group and Upper Cretaceous Dinosaurs group have obvious differences. My advise is that 「Category:Cretaceous dinosaurs」 can be divided into 「Category:Lower Cretaceous dinosaurs」 and 「Category:Upper Cretaceous dinosaurs」.
Also, I have a question about Dinosaurs in Pakistan. There seveal Dinosaurs found in Pakistan, such as:
Balochisaurus. My question is that whether Pakistan was a part of Indian-Madagascar in Cretaceous, or just a part of Asia continent. If Pakistan was a part of Indian-Madagascar, maybe the above articles should be moved into Category:Dinosaurs of India and Madagascar
hoseumou(talk) 13:59, 12 December 2009 (UTC)
Hadrosaur bipedality
- Fair enough, although I still think it shouldn't be included in the Jurassic Park article for two reasons: the work is unpublished; and perhaps more importantly, it's a bit unfair to call the JP people on it when it was perfectly legitimate to have bipedal running hadrosaurs in the 1990s. I think the page should stick to things that were known to be inaccurate or questionable at the time of production, like sizes and creative embellishments (intelligence, pretty much anything to do with Dilophosaurus, etc.). J. Spencer (talk) 04:39, 7 January 2010 (UTC)
Service awards proposal
Hello, J. Spencer/Archive 3! I noticed you display a service award, and would like to invite you to join the discussion over a proposed revamping of the awards.
If you have any opinions on the proposal, please participate in the discussion. Thanks! — the Man in Question (in question) 04:14, 8 January 2010 (UTC)
Kinkonychelys.
- Thank you very much! Oh no! It's not here!!! (talk) 08:00, 12 January 2010 (UTC)
- Hi again! Following your suggestions, I've gotten the page's main content up to 1227 characters, but of course, it still falls short of the DYK requirement by nearly 300 characters. The only information I can see in the paper about the genus that can still be included is the physical descriptions of the different specimens, and personal experience tells me I'm not too handy when it comes to understanding all of the scientific words used in these descriptions. I really want this article to become a DYK article, though, and I've already seen a few facts in what's been included that might "impress the judges" substantially for inclusion in a DYK update. If it's no trouble, and if any of that information is notable for inclusion in the article, could you please help with adding it in? That would be very much appreciated! Oh no! It's not here!!! (talk) 09:58, 12 January 2010 (UTC)
- Thanks again! Oh no! It's not here!!! (talk) 23:05, 12 January 2010 (UTC)
- Thanks a million, J. Spencer!!! Oh no! It's not here!!! (talk) 00:27, 13 January 2010 (UTC)
Talk:Dinosaur archiving
Deinonychus
- Thank you! I'm not actually very familiar with IPA, but people who are set up the templates on the dinosaur articles, and since this one's been stable for a long time, I figured it was probably a gag or a test edit. J. Spencer (talk) 00:50, 21 January 2010 (UTC)
- I cannot read IPA either - I merely "sounded it out", as you might phrase it. ;) -RadicalOne•Contact Me•Chase My Tail 02:44, 21 January 2010 (UTC)
WikiProject Dinosaurs in the Signpost
Redirects and categories
- Well, it doesn't really bother me either way; it just looked funny having it on a redirect. Species of Psittacosaurus
- I added comments o how to improve the article. GamerPro64 (talk) 01:59, 5 February 2010 (UTC)]
- I sorry to bother you but did you have me give suggestions to improve the article so you can improve the it or for someone else who would want to? GamerPro64 (talk) 23:18, 6 February 2010 (UTC).
- Thank you, J. Spencer!!! Oh no! It's not here!!! (talk) 23:39, 7 February 2010 (UTC)
Reply
Rhabdognathus.
- Okay then. Thank you for the links! Oh no! It's not here!!! (talk) 07:25, 2 March 2010 (UTC)
Linheraptor.
- Thanks! Oh no! It's not here!!! (talk) 02:31, 21 March 2010 (UTC)
Guanlong imageHello,
I've uploaded some images yesterday and put them with some articles.
You said that my images weren't the kind that you're looking for.
Is this one a bit better?
Guanlong wucaii Kind regards from 82.169.6.135 (talk) 13:45, 1 April 2010 (UTC) or better known as Joerim on the Dutch Wikipedia.
Welcome back
Re: Penghusuchus
Brachi and Giraffatitan
- I am torn between keeping a tidy list at the bottom and placing them at first use. I guess the latter is simply more common, and also easier to work with once the text doesn't change much anymore. However, writing the Plateosaurus article showed me that for a total re-write a list at the end would have been better - I spent lots of time searching through the editor. So I guess I'll keep the alphabetical list, and once the text is ready for the main page I'll place the citation at the first use. HMallison (talk) 06:08, 12 May 2010 (UTC)
You're quite right to prod me - however, I must point to the sauropoda re-write, which is devloping into a physiology of dinosaurs update.... I had some rough weeks, work and kids' health wise, but hope to contribute the missing data within the next few days. Then the text will need a thorough massage - was that you vounteering??? ;) HMallison (talk) 06:45, 15 June 2010 (UTC)
- Give me a day or two more, and I'll have a rough structure ready. Then we should talk about it - may or may not be best to use your structure. HMallison (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 15:57, 16 June 2010 (UTC).
If you're into sauropods....here's a must read for you :) Long, boring, but a "deal-breaker", 'cause it has all you ever need to know and cite (I hope).
http://www3.interscience.wiley.com/cgi-bin/fulltext/123397084/HTMLSTART
PDF here:
http://www3.interscience.wiley.com/cgi-bin/fulltext/123397084/PDFSTART
HMallison (talk) 23:35, 16 May 2010 (UTC)
- well, it took me three years to understand it all - but that did involve the research, too ;) Aachenosaurus
- Dunno. I've gone ahead and semi-protected for a month. We'll see if it deters this fellow or fellows. Only the pages listed at Wikipedia:Pending changes/Testing are to be flagged for pending changes. Firsfron of Ronchester 04:10, 9 July 2010 (UTC)
Family treeHi, I'm from the Dutch Wikipedia. Because I want an article to be finished tommorow (I'm going on holliday) I needed help from someone quikly, so I come to you. Maybe you still know me from the illustration of the Guanlong. Here's the problem:
<font color="white">unnamed
<font color="white">unnamed
<font color="white">unnamed
Champsosauridae
<font color="white">unnamed
familie Simoedosauridae
<font color="white">unnamed
?
Champsosauridae
I've got two family trees. The upper one is good, but in front of it there has to be "familie Simoedosauridae", like with the second one. Can you help me, please? Kind regards from 82.169.6.135 (talk) 19:48, 14 July 2010 (UTC) or Joerim, as I'm known at the Dutch Wikipedia.
- Thank you very much! Only one thing, what mistake did I make when making one of these family trees? Kind regards from 82.169.6.135 (talk) 07:35, 15 July 2010 (UTC) or Joerim
Talkback
Concavenator imageHi, I uploaded an image to Concavenator but it was removed due to it not being anatomically rigorous. I did a new one, which is here http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Conc2.png I used this image http://images.nationalgeographic.com/wpf/media-live/photos/000/257/cache/humpback-dinosaur-life-reconstruction_25710_600x450.jpg as a model, but I don't know if mine is yet fit to be used in the article. Any help on how are images judged would be very appreciated (I also posted all this on the article's talk page but I don't know if it will get much attention there).
thank you very much
Nestor db (talk) 18:44, 10 September 2010 (UTC)
Parks ref
-
Albertonykus
Irano-Afgan
Hello, Cyrus111;
I'm sorry, but I'm not familiar enough with the topic to comment on sources. I just periodically disambiguate the term morphology, and Irano-Afghan came up in one of my earlier sweeps. I have fixed another wikilink for the article, though. If a source is authoritative, it should be used, although for basic information I would probably stick to the early 20th century anthropologists instead of modern websites. J. Spencer (talk) 16:22, 9 November 2008 (UTC)
Hi, well 2 sources are from coon the other from shool of Athens both from 20th century, so keep them??? I like how it unifies people and creates affinity and learns about history the problem is the texts that are put in the one from school of Athens where it has been modified, and also there is the text from Mr. Gregor. I should probably get more opinions on this matter so to reach a consensus Cyrus111 (talk) 16:59, 11 November 2008 (UTC)
Dinosaur Park Formation
My picsHey J. Spenser on the Abelisaurus page I put those pictures up. I am wondering if there are Dinosaurs that have had most of their body discovered can I make a size comparison? Nrg800 (talk)
Thanks that makes more sense. But is that diagram that I did for the fossil finds okay?
Nrg800 (talk) 06:33, 21 November 2008 (UTC)
Thank you alot for that Commons link I better get to work making a new one XD Nrg800 (talk) 07:30, 26 November 2008 (UTC)
Thanks
Azhdarch cat
Desert extinctness
Perfect!! Keep up the great work The Bald One White cat 18:45, 14 December 2008 (UTC)
Talk: List of dinosaurs
Stego distro
DYK for Peloroplites
On 24 December, 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Peloroplites, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.
BorgQueen (talk) 07:37, 24 December 2008 (UTC)
WP:DABS and 718 Bot
- Done! talk) 16:07, 17 January 2009 (UTC)]
Argentinosaurus
Pterosaurs format
- Great! :) Abyssal (talk) 00:15, 21 January 2009 (UTC)
- I tweaked the Q-Z section again so that it should look better on bigger monitors and/or higher resolutions. I haven't had a chance to look at it on my home monitor (at school now), so I thought I'd try to get some extra eyes on this until I can. Does it look any different/better/worse? Abyssal (talk) 16:08, 21 January 2009 (UTC)
- Thanks! That's what it should look like; it's what I see too. However, on the really large monitor's at my uni it actually looks wider, whereas the previous version left a big ugly gap. It looks a smidgen worse today on my monitor (and yours apparently) but it looks a heapload better that way on the monitors at school, and since people at schools form a large block of our viewers I think the tradeoff is justifiable. :) Abyssal (talk) 04:24, 22 January 2009 (UTC)
To J. Spencer
You edited what I said about Pterodactyls. While everything about them eating human babies was crap, Pterodactyl Awareness Month does exist. I have seen T-Shirts and calenders. Please revert the article. -Sabotage2595
Edmontosaurus
DYK for Akanthosuchus
On February 14, 2009, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Akanthosuchus, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.
--Dravecky (talk) 04:22, 14 February 2009 (UTC)
Birds and dinosaurs
- Yeah, every so often some well-intentioned type comes along and removes "non-avian" from a dinosaur article. It beats the incredible expanding theropods and the cartoon cameo edits. J. Spencer (talk) 23:35, 25 February 2009 (UTC)
Barnstar
The Original Barnstar
For all-around good work, I award J. Spencer this Barnstar. Keep it up!--ragesoss (talk) 00:22, 26 February 2009 (UTC)
No lapsus calami in poposauridae?
Thanks
Dibothrosuchus
- Done! talk) 19:49, 7 March 2009 (UTC)
DYK for Miragaia (dinosaur)
On Miragaia (dinosaur), which you recently nominated. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.
Royalbroil 02:11, 6 March 2009 (UTC)
Edmontosaurus
DYK for Phyllodontosuchus
On March 9, 2009, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Phyllodontosuchus, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.
Shubinator (talk) 00:23, 9 March 2009 (UTC)
DYK for Dibothrosuchus
On March 12, 2009, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Dibothrosuchus, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.
Congratulations! PeterSymonds (talk) 22:13, 12 March 2009 (UTC)
Edmontosaurus
The entire article needs its prose reviewed; I merely listed items from the lead for starters. Regarding the use of animal: it's good to state the obvious, it's an easy-to-grasp non-jargon-y word, and it saves you from having to say the animal's name or "it" a lot. 05:01, 17 March 2009 (UTC)
DYK
Argentinosaurus againHello, I search for help about Argentinosaurus again. It seems that there are three papers about Argentinosaurus in 90s, such as:
- Appenzeller, T. 1994. Argentine dinos vie for heavyweight titles. Science 266, 1805.
- Paul, G.S. 1994. Is Garden Park home to the world’s largest known land animal? Garden Park Paleontology Society 4, 5.
- Paul, G.S. 1997. Dinosaur models: the good, the bad, and using them to estimate the mass of dinosaurs. In Wolberg, D.L., Stump, E. and Rosenberg, G.D. (eds), DinoFest International Proceedings, pp
But i can't find these papers in internet. Can you search these papers, and find out the length and weight of Argentinosaurus in these papers?
I'll be very thankful if you can help me, thanks. hoseumou 08:40, 28 March 2009 (UTC)
- Thanks you for your answer. But i have a question, it seems that [Early reconstructions estimated...] directly comes from Dinosaur Mailing List. Is that techniquely enough to be a reference? Finally, I have to say I very admired your dinosaur article, such as Edmontosaurus. :) hoseumou 07:43, 31 March 2009 (UTC)
QuinceratopsHi, Firs;
You'd better nail the article, too. J. Spencer (talk) 18:02, 24 May 2009 (UTC)
- Thanks J. The article was still redlinked when I removed it from Ceratopsidae. I'm not sure what to do about the image on Commons, File:Quinceratops 03869.JPG. Probably someone should be notified. Firsfron of Ronchester 18:15, 24 May 2009 (UTC)
- Moab man can probably be salvaged, given time (and a little TNT). Firsfron of Ronchester 19:33, 24 May 2009 (UTC)]
Piveteausaurus
RajasaurusHi! Spencer,
The following are quoated from Rjanag's talk page.
May I request you to please revisit the above article to review the tag, since another expert on the subject has edited it?--Nvvchar (talk) 09:46, 16 May 2009 (UTC)
- Hey Nvvchar, sorry it's taken me so long to get back. Anyway, it would probably be better to ask J. Spencer about this, since he's the one who did the rewriting and he's more familiar with the content. I'm sure that if he went through it it's probably all fine now, but I'd feel more comfortable letting him remove the tag (since he knows what the state of the article is, whereas all I can do right now is assume—and I'd rather not go through one sentence at a time, as JSpencer probably already has). rʨanaɢ talk/contribs 21:18, 30 May 2009 (UTC)
Since, as a well known expert in the field, you have edited the version of Rajasaurus after Rjanag,s tag, which was earlier also edited by a group of users of the
Dinosaurs Portal with extensive experience in this field, would you kindly consider removing the tag on the article? I am in the process of getting some pictures of Rajasuarus model erected in Lucknow India posted on the article. Thanks--Nvvchar (talk) 02:58, 31 May 2009 (UTC)]
- Thank you very much. I hope I will have opportunities in the near future on the ]
- Can you nominate this article for GA status since it is already assessed as "B" class and many of
Dinosaurs portal members like yourself and others have put in a lot of effort to improve it?--Nvvchar (talk) 15:37, 1 August 2009 (UTC)]
Heterodontosauridae
- I highly doubt that somebody would consider it OR, but it's better to be safe than sorry. Thanks for contacting the other editor, and hopefully a source can be found for it. --Happy editing! Nehrams2020 (talk • contrib) 05:04, 2 June 2009 (UTC)
Piveteau's brain probably was bigger than a walnut
- I think it's great. I think he was a scientific illustrator also; although many scientists at the time did their own illustrations, he was known for his. I tried to confirm this information to include in the article but found nothing specific. The illustrations can be included in both the dinosaur and bio articles, if you can get decent copies. If you don't get decent copies, and I have time, I can resketch at least the most important one of them if they're out of copyright. --69.226.103.13 (talk) 22:56, 2 June 2009 (UTC)
User 173.35.129.119 issues....I just undid a half dozen bad edits of his...again. He just got the temporary ban lifted and is right back at it..
it's gotten to where someone needs to get a perma ban put on that IP address. It's vandalism at this point. I don't know if you have that ability or can get in contact with someone who does, but it's really time. Forescore68 (talk) 16:15, 13 June 2009 (UTC)
- Oh, and thanks for cleaning up my Chuandongocoelurus mess...I did it in a huffy. Glad I don't lose points in this forum for being hasty and dumb...Forescore68 (talk) 02:33, 18 June 2009 (UTC)
Italictitle templateHi, Firs;
I just found out something useful about the italictitle template: I already knew that if it is put at the top, it prevents the uppermost [edit] bracket from showing. However, if it's put below the taxobox, as Bob did at Pteranodon and I just did with Allosaurus, it doesn't interfere. I don't know if this has editing drawbacks, but it's very good to know we can get back the edit bracket for the lede section, especially for ginormous articles. J. Spencer (talk) 01:35, 17 June 2009 (UTC)
- Hey!
- I didn't realize it prevents the uppermost edit link from showing. We might want to bring this up at tree of life. Either this should be fixed through the template itself, or I could possibly AWB it; I think there is a pretty easy way to delete the template name while substituting the same template name immediately below the taxobox. If this is acceptable to you (and everyone else who works in these areas), I could work on this tomorrow. Thanks for catching this. Firsfron of Ronchester 06:17, 17 June 2009 (UTC).
- P.S. Also, I'd like to make sure I interpreted everything I've included in the article correctly. Thanks in advance! Mess around with the guy in shades all you like - don't mess around with the girl in gloves! (talk) 08:28, 26 June 2009 (UTC)
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template. Mess around with the guy in shades all you like - don't mess around with the girl in gloves! (talk) 00:41, 27 June 2009 (UTC)
- I reveiewed the DYK hook for this, and everything looks fine except that I had some minor wording changes to the hook. If you are okay with those changes, please indicate so in its DYK submission at Template talk:Did You Know#Gallardosaurus and I can approve the hook. Rlendog (talk) 02:17, 8 July 2009 (UTC)]
New hoaxHi, Firs;
Here's a new one to nail, if it's still here by the time you read this: Rorasaurus. J. Spencer (talk) 13:19, 1 July 2009 (UTC)
(I'd watch Roarasaurus too, as they may try to recreate it.) J. Spencer (talk) 13:27, 1 July 2009 (UTC)
- Thanks. I've just nuked it. Firsfron of Ronchester 13:53, 1 July 2009 (UTC)
- Yeah, I'm going to start re-inquiring about the possibility of fixing WP:DABS. As you say, if some random IP hadn't added the name to the List, you wouldn't have noticed it. That's not good. Firsfron of Ronchester 00:47, 2 July 2009 (UTC)
- It's true: DABS was just one way of catching potential hoaxes (or very short new articles that editors sometimes create), but it was nice to have that option. Firsfron of Ronchester 04:32, 2 July 2009 (UTC)
- I had no idea it would be that easy. Request, and within an hour, voila! Firsfron of Ronchester 03:21, 13 July 2009 (UTC)
Thanks...
ITN for Australovenator, Diamantinasaurus and Wintonotitan
On In the news candidates page.
--BorgQueen (talk) 20:14, 4 July 2009 (UTC)
2009 hadrosaur chewing study
- I think with any article (media or not) there is a possibility of inaccuracies; that's why we check it with other sources, which is what I did in this Leonardo case. But I respect your opinion. I guess we'll just see where the AFD goes. — Hunter Kahn (c) 17:23, 5 July 2009 (UTC)
DYK for Gallardosaurus
On DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.
Wizardman 08:51, 10 July 2009 (UTC)
HerrerasaurusHey J,
After tomorrow, I am going on a 10-day wikibreak out of state, and may not have a ton of internet access. With the assistance of a lot of folks (including you... thanks, BTW) Herrerasaurus made it to FA, but there are still grammar adjustments that an editor wants to make. Can you take a look? I'm worried I won't be able to devote (much/any) time to genuine concerns over clarity. Firsfron of Ronchester 01:39, 30 July 2009 (UTC)
Carniadactylus.
Loch Ness Monster
- I think s/he’s almost figured out what was needed. Now, if only s/he could figure out how to enter citations fully … — SpikeToronto (talk) 17:21, 14 September 2009 (UTC)
- Well, it looks like it's taken care of, which goes on the positive side in my book. Thank you for the help! J. Spencer (talk) 03:09, 15 September 2009 (UTC)
Those hadrosaurs sure liked to eat, huh?
The Original Barnstar
For substantial additions to the Hadrosaur diet article, I salute you! Abyssal (talk) 03:55, 4 October 2009 (UTC)
Fruitadens
ITN for Fruitadens
On 22 October 2009, In the news was updated with a news item that involved the article Fruitadens, which you substantially updated. If you know of another interesting news item involving a recently created or updated article, then please suggest it on the candidates page.
--BorgQueen (talk) 16:32, 22 October 2009 (UTC)
RajasaurusHi!Spencer,
Congratulations for the GA upgarde of the artcile. Also thanks.--Nvvchar (talk) 18:34, 22 October 2009 (UTC)
Eld's DeerHi! Spencer,
Thanks for the message regarding
Eld's Deer was posted by me on DYK quite some months back and accepted. Since you are an expert in Fauna, will you please advice me if I should post it for GA upgrade. Thanks.--Nvvchar (talk) 02:04, 23 October 2009 (UTC)]
Re: Rajasaurus ga-rev
New find of Dinosaurs nestling ground in IndiaHi! Spencer,
A few days back I had read the above news item in several news papers in India. I have prepared a short write up on the same for any suitable insertion in the Portal or News item. Please see here
User:Nvvchar/sandbox/Ashokan Edicts (Delhi). You may kndly edit it suitably and if it has not appeared on the News page of WP you may consider posting it as a joint news item. Thanks.--Nvvchar (talk) 05:16, 28 October 2009 (UTC)]
Ceratonykus
ScienceDirectHi J,
Do you have access to ScienceDirect? I don't want to pay $31.50 for a paper which discusses "Teleocrater", especially when I don't know how detailed the portion on "Teleocrater" is. The cladogram from their analysis is viewable here, but that doesn't give me much to work with. I figured you being you, you might subscribe to their (rather expensive) service. If not, I'll just leave "Teleo" as he is for now. Firsfron of Ronchester 04:09, 12 November 2009 (UTC)
- Thanks J. As it turns out, a reference librarian I work with has access to the paper, so I now have it. Thanks again for offering. Take care, Firsfron of Ronchester 00:25, 13 November 2009 (UTC)
"Name"?
I know the scientific name should type in Name. But i see lots of scientific name in wikipedia were type in "Name". Why?
Is that official rules that Nomen nudum, Nomen oblitum, Nomen dubium should type in "Name"? or it is just a wikipedia rules? User:Devilfish1962 01:43, 26 Nov. 2009 (UTC)
96.239.237.62Hi, Firs;
I noticed you reverted
Bayosaurus". Having fixed a string of their edits this morning, I am 99% certain that this is the latest version of an editor who was recently blocked at 96.242.198.33 (talk · contribs) for inserting false dates, locations, and other information to paleo articles, and false episodes and voice actors to television shows. Something to keep an eye on, I suppose. J. Spencer (talk) 16:21, 28 November 2009 (UTC)]
- Hi J. Thanks. I wasn't aware of that. Something else to watch out for is this. Firsfron of Ronchester 17:07, 28 November 2009 (UTC)
ThescelosaurusHey J,
It looks like the Hungarian version of Thescelosaurus has become a FA! You're making a difference, even in languages you don't speak. :) (At least, I assume you don't speak Hungarian...) Firsfron of Ronchester 05:52, 30 November 2009 (UTC)
- That's a really weird discovery. I have the 2008 archosauriform histology study at work (I left it on my desk and I'm at home now), and they still treated "Teleocrater" as if it wasn't described. Despite being undescribed, the 2008 study, too, did give a lot of detail (about half a page, as I recall), as well as some illustrations. How does something remain "undescribed" when there's that much detail? I'll take another look tomorrow, but I'm pretty sure the '08 study didn't mention a specific epithet (or I would definitely have mentioned it in the article), and it certainly didn't mention "Thecodontosaurus" alophos or alphos. Firsfron of Ronchester 05:22, 1 December 2009 (UTC)
An idea I wanted to run by you
- I'm glad you like the idea. I doubt Naish and the gang would get too involved, but where the two projects overlap, they may be willing to help. I'm gonna do some more brain storming, maybe a rough draft or two and then send the Dinolist a message. Abyssal (talk) 00:28, 3 December 2009 (UTC)
DYK for Stegomosuchus
On DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.
Materialscientist (talk) 11:44, 3 December 2009 (UTC)
Category:Cretaceous dinosaursHello J. Spencer, I have an advise about Category of Dinosaurs. At present, there are 56 articles in Category:Triassic dinosaurs, 245 articles in Category:Jurassic dinosaurs, and 617 articles in Category:Cretaceous dinosaurs.
However, Cretaceous is around 80 million years long, almost equaled to Late Triassic adding Jurassic. Besides, the Lower Cretaceous Dinosaurs group and Upper Cretaceous Dinosaurs group have obvious differences. My advise is that 「Category:Cretaceous dinosaurs」 can be divided into 「Category:Lower Cretaceous dinosaurs」 and 「Category:Upper Cretaceous dinosaurs」.
Also, I have a question about Dinosaurs in Pakistan. There seveal Dinosaurs found in Pakistan, such as:
Balochisaurus. My question is that whether Pakistan was a part of Indian-Madagascar in Cretaceous, or just a part of Asia continent. If Pakistan was a part of Indian-Madagascar, maybe the above articles should be moved into Category:Dinosaurs of India and Madagascar
hoseumou(talk) 13:59, 12 December 2009 (UTC)
Hadrosaur bipedality
- Fair enough, although I still think it shouldn't be included in the Jurassic Park article for two reasons: the work is unpublished; and perhaps more importantly, it's a bit unfair to call the JP people on it when it was perfectly legitimate to have bipedal running hadrosaurs in the 1990s. I think the page should stick to things that were known to be inaccurate or questionable at the time of production, like sizes and creative embellishments (intelligence, pretty much anything to do with Dilophosaurus, etc.). J. Spencer (talk) 04:39, 7 January 2010 (UTC)
Service awards proposal
Hello, J. Spencer/Archive 3! I noticed you display a service award, and would like to invite you to join the discussion over a proposed revamping of the awards.
If you have any opinions on the proposal, please participate in the discussion. Thanks! — the Man in Question (in question) 04:14, 8 January 2010 (UTC)
Kinkonychelys.
- Thank you very much! Oh no! It's not here!!! (talk) 08:00, 12 January 2010 (UTC)
- Hi again! Following your suggestions, I've gotten the page's main content up to 1227 characters, but of course, it still falls short of the DYK requirement by nearly 300 characters. The only information I can see in the paper about the genus that can still be included is the physical descriptions of the different specimens, and personal experience tells me I'm not too handy when it comes to understanding all of the scientific words used in these descriptions. I really want this article to become a DYK article, though, and I've already seen a few facts in what's been included that might "impress the judges" substantially for inclusion in a DYK update. If it's no trouble, and if any of that information is notable for inclusion in the article, could you please help with adding it in? That would be very much appreciated! Oh no! It's not here!!! (talk) 09:58, 12 January 2010 (UTC)
- Thanks again! Oh no! It's not here!!! (talk) 23:05, 12 January 2010 (UTC)
- Thanks a million, J. Spencer!!! Oh no! It's not here!!! (talk) 00:27, 13 January 2010 (UTC)
Talk:Dinosaur archiving
Deinonychus
- Thank you! I'm not actually very familiar with IPA, but people who are set up the templates on the dinosaur articles, and since this one's been stable for a long time, I figured it was probably a gag or a test edit. J. Spencer (talk) 00:50, 21 January 2010 (UTC)
- I cannot read IPA either - I merely "sounded it out", as you might phrase it. ;) -RadicalOne•Contact Me•Chase My Tail 02:44, 21 January 2010 (UTC)
WikiProject Dinosaurs in the Signpost
Redirects and categories
- Well, it doesn't really bother me either way; it just looked funny having it on a redirect. Species of Psittacosaurus
- I added comments o how to improve the article. GamerPro64 (talk) 01:59, 5 February 2010 (UTC)]
- I sorry to bother you but did you have me give suggestions to improve the article so you can improve the it or for someone else who would want to? GamerPro64 (talk) 23:18, 6 February 2010 (UTC).
- Thank you, J. Spencer!!! Oh no! It's not here!!! (talk) 23:39, 7 February 2010 (UTC)
Reply
Rhabdognathus.
- Okay then. Thank you for the links! Oh no! It's not here!!! (talk) 07:25, 2 March 2010 (UTC)
Linheraptor.
- Thanks! Oh no! It's not here!!! (talk) 02:31, 21 March 2010 (UTC)
Guanlong imageHello,
I've uploaded some images yesterday and put them with some articles.
You said that my images weren't the kind that you're looking for.
Is this one a bit better?
Guanlong wucaii Kind regards from 82.169.6.135 (talk) 13:45, 1 April 2010 (UTC) or better known as Joerim on the Dutch Wikipedia.
Welcome back
Re: Penghusuchus
Brachi and Giraffatitan
- I am torn between keeping a tidy list at the bottom and placing them at first use. I guess the latter is simply more common, and also easier to work with once the text doesn't change much anymore. However, writing the Plateosaurus article showed me that for a total re-write a list at the end would have been better - I spent lots of time searching through the editor. So I guess I'll keep the alphabetical list, and once the text is ready for the main page I'll place the citation at the first use. HMallison (talk) 06:08, 12 May 2010 (UTC)
You're quite right to prod me - however, I must point to the sauropoda re-write, which is devloping into a physiology of dinosaurs update.... I had some rough weeks, work and kids' health wise, but hope to contribute the missing data within the next few days. Then the text will need a thorough massage - was that you vounteering??? ;) HMallison (talk) 06:45, 15 June 2010 (UTC)
- Give me a day or two more, and I'll have a rough structure ready. Then we should talk about it - may or may not be best to use your structure. HMallison (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 15:57, 16 June 2010 (UTC).
If you're into sauropods....here's a must read for you :) Long, boring, but a "deal-breaker", 'cause it has all you ever need to know and cite (I hope).
http://www3.interscience.wiley.com/cgi-bin/fulltext/123397084/HTMLSTART
PDF here:
http://www3.interscience.wiley.com/cgi-bin/fulltext/123397084/PDFSTART
HMallison (talk) 23:35, 16 May 2010 (UTC)
- well, it took me three years to understand it all - but that did involve the research, too ;) Aachenosaurus
- Dunno. I've gone ahead and semi-protected for a month. We'll see if it deters this fellow or fellows. Only the pages listed at Wikipedia:Pending changes/Testing are to be flagged for pending changes. Firsfron of Ronchester 04:10, 9 July 2010 (UTC)
Family treeHi, I'm from the Dutch Wikipedia. Because I want an article to be finished tommorow (I'm going on holliday) I needed help from someone quikly, so I come to you. Maybe you still know me from the illustration of the Guanlong. Here's the problem:
<font color="white">unnamed
<font color="white">unnamed
<font color="white">unnamed
Champsosauridae
<font color="white">unnamed
familie Simoedosauridae
<font color="white">unnamed
?
Champsosauridae
I've got two family trees. The upper one is good, but in front of it there has to be "familie Simoedosauridae", like with the second one. Can you help me, please? Kind regards from 82.169.6.135 (talk) 19:48, 14 July 2010 (UTC) or Joerim, as I'm known at the Dutch Wikipedia.
- Thank you very much! Only one thing, what mistake did I make when making one of these family trees? Kind regards from 82.169.6.135 (talk) 07:35, 15 July 2010 (UTC) or Joerim
Talkback
Concavenator imageHi, I uploaded an image to Concavenator but it was removed due to it not being anatomically rigorous. I did a new one, which is here http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Conc2.png I used this image http://images.nationalgeographic.com/wpf/media-live/photos/000/257/cache/humpback-dinosaur-life-reconstruction_25710_600x450.jpg as a model, but I don't know if mine is yet fit to be used in the article. Any help on how are images judged would be very appreciated (I also posted all this on the article's talk page but I don't know if it will get much attention there).
thank you very much
Nestor db (talk) 18:44, 10 September 2010 (UTC)
Parks ref
-
Irano-Afgan
Hello, Cyrus111;
I'm sorry, but I'm not familiar enough with the topic to comment on sources. I just periodically disambiguate the term morphology, and Irano-Afghan came up in one of my earlier sweeps. I have fixed another wikilink for the article, though. If a source is authoritative, it should be used, although for basic information I would probably stick to the early 20th century anthropologists instead of modern websites. J. Spencer (talk) 16:22, 9 November 2008 (UTC)
Hi, well 2 sources are from coon the other from shool of Athens both from 20th century, so keep them??? I like how it unifies people and creates affinity and learns about history the problem is the texts that are put in the one from school of Athens where it has been modified, and also there is the text from Mr. Gregor. I should probably get more opinions on this matter so to reach a consensus Cyrus111 (talk) 16:59, 11 November 2008 (UTC)
Dinosaur Park Formation
My picsHey J. Spenser on the Abelisaurus page I put those pictures up. I am wondering if there are Dinosaurs that have had most of their body discovered can I make a size comparison? Nrg800 (talk)
Thanks that makes more sense. But is that diagram that I did for the fossil finds okay?
Nrg800 (talk) 06:33, 21 November 2008 (UTC)
Thank you alot for that Commons link I better get to work making a new one XD Nrg800 (talk) 07:30, 26 November 2008 (UTC)
Thanks
Azhdarch cat
Desert extinctness
Perfect!! Keep up the great work The Bald One White cat 18:45, 14 December 2008 (UTC)
Talk: List of dinosaurs
Stego distro
DYK for Peloroplites
On 24 December, 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Peloroplites, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.
BorgQueen (talk) 07:37, 24 December 2008 (UTC)
WP:DABS and 718 Bot
- Done! talk) 16:07, 17 January 2009 (UTC)]
Argentinosaurus
Pterosaurs format
- Great! :) Abyssal (talk) 00:15, 21 January 2009 (UTC)
- I tweaked the Q-Z section again so that it should look better on bigger monitors and/or higher resolutions. I haven't had a chance to look at it on my home monitor (at school now), so I thought I'd try to get some extra eyes on this until I can. Does it look any different/better/worse? Abyssal (talk) 16:08, 21 January 2009 (UTC)
- Thanks! That's what it should look like; it's what I see too. However, on the really large monitor's at my uni it actually looks wider, whereas the previous version left a big ugly gap. It looks a smidgen worse today on my monitor (and yours apparently) but it looks a heapload better that way on the monitors at school, and since people at schools form a large block of our viewers I think the tradeoff is justifiable. :) Abyssal (talk) 04:24, 22 January 2009 (UTC)
To J. Spencer
You edited what I said about Pterodactyls. While everything about them eating human babies was crap, Pterodactyl Awareness Month does exist. I have seen T-Shirts and calenders. Please revert the article. -Sabotage2595
Edmontosaurus
DYK for Akanthosuchus
On February 14, 2009, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Akanthosuchus, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.
--Dravecky (talk) 04:22, 14 February 2009 (UTC)
Birds and dinosaurs
- Yeah, every so often some well-intentioned type comes along and removes "non-avian" from a dinosaur article. It beats the incredible expanding theropods and the cartoon cameo edits. J. Spencer (talk) 23:35, 25 February 2009 (UTC)
Barnstar
The Original Barnstar
For all-around good work, I award J. Spencer this Barnstar. Keep it up!--ragesoss (talk) 00:22, 26 February 2009 (UTC)
No lapsus calami in poposauridae?
Thanks
Dibothrosuchus
- Done! talk) 19:49, 7 March 2009 (UTC)
DYK for Miragaia (dinosaur)
On Miragaia (dinosaur), which you recently nominated. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.
Royalbroil 02:11, 6 March 2009 (UTC)
Edmontosaurus
DYK for Phyllodontosuchus
On March 9, 2009, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Phyllodontosuchus, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.
Shubinator (talk) 00:23, 9 March 2009 (UTC)
DYK for Dibothrosuchus
On March 12, 2009, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Dibothrosuchus, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.
Congratulations! PeterSymonds (talk) 22:13, 12 March 2009 (UTC)
Edmontosaurus
The entire article needs its prose reviewed; I merely listed items from the lead for starters. Regarding the use of animal: it's good to state the obvious, it's an easy-to-grasp non-jargon-y word, and it saves you from having to say the animal's name or "it" a lot. 05:01, 17 March 2009 (UTC)
DYK
Argentinosaurus againHello, I search for help about Argentinosaurus again. It seems that there are three papers about Argentinosaurus in 90s, such as:
- Appenzeller, T. 1994. Argentine dinos vie for heavyweight titles. Science 266, 1805.
- Paul, G.S. 1994. Is Garden Park home to the world’s largest known land animal? Garden Park Paleontology Society 4, 5.
- Paul, G.S. 1997. Dinosaur models: the good, the bad, and using them to estimate the mass of dinosaurs. In Wolberg, D.L., Stump, E. and Rosenberg, G.D. (eds), DinoFest International Proceedings, pp
But i can't find these papers in internet. Can you search these papers, and find out the length and weight of Argentinosaurus in these papers?
I'll be very thankful if you can help me, thanks. hoseumou 08:40, 28 March 2009 (UTC)
- Thanks you for your answer. But i have a question, it seems that [Early reconstructions estimated...] directly comes from Dinosaur Mailing List. Is that techniquely enough to be a reference? Finally, I have to say I very admired your dinosaur article, such as Edmontosaurus. :) hoseumou 07:43, 31 March 2009 (UTC)
QuinceratopsHi, Firs;
You'd better nail the article, too. J. Spencer (talk) 18:02, 24 May 2009 (UTC)
- Thanks J. The article was still redlinked when I removed it from Ceratopsidae. I'm not sure what to do about the image on Commons, File:Quinceratops 03869.JPG. Probably someone should be notified. Firsfron of Ronchester 18:15, 24 May 2009 (UTC)
- Moab man can probably be salvaged, given time (and a little TNT). Firsfron of Ronchester 19:33, 24 May 2009 (UTC)]
Piveteausaurus
RajasaurusHi! Spencer,
The following are quoated from Rjanag's talk page.
May I request you to please revisit the above article to review the tag, since another expert on the subject has edited it?--Nvvchar (talk) 09:46, 16 May 2009 (UTC)
- Hey Nvvchar, sorry it's taken me so long to get back. Anyway, it would probably be better to ask J. Spencer about this, since he's the one who did the rewriting and he's more familiar with the content. I'm sure that if he went through it it's probably all fine now, but I'd feel more comfortable letting him remove the tag (since he knows what the state of the article is, whereas all I can do right now is assume—and I'd rather not go through one sentence at a time, as JSpencer probably already has). rʨanaɢ talk/contribs 21:18, 30 May 2009 (UTC)
Since, as a well known expert in the field, you have edited the version of Rajasaurus after Rjanag,s tag, which was earlier also edited by a group of users of the
Dinosaurs Portal with extensive experience in this field, would you kindly consider removing the tag on the article? I am in the process of getting some pictures of Rajasuarus model erected in Lucknow India posted on the article. Thanks--Nvvchar (talk) 02:58, 31 May 2009 (UTC)]
- Thank you very much. I hope I will have opportunities in the near future on the ]
- Can you nominate this article for GA status since it is already assessed as "B" class and many of
Dinosaurs portal members like yourself and others have put in a lot of effort to improve it?--Nvvchar (talk) 15:37, 1 August 2009 (UTC)]
Heterodontosauridae
- I highly doubt that somebody would consider it OR, but it's better to be safe than sorry. Thanks for contacting the other editor, and hopefully a source can be found for it. --Happy editing! Nehrams2020 (talk • contrib) 05:04, 2 June 2009 (UTC)
Piveteau's brain probably was bigger than a walnut
- I think it's great. I think he was a scientific illustrator also; although many scientists at the time did their own illustrations, he was known for his. I tried to confirm this information to include in the article but found nothing specific. The illustrations can be included in both the dinosaur and bio articles, if you can get decent copies. If you don't get decent copies, and I have time, I can resketch at least the most important one of them if they're out of copyright. --69.226.103.13 (talk) 22:56, 2 June 2009 (UTC)
User 173.35.129.119 issues....I just undid a half dozen bad edits of his...again. He just got the temporary ban lifted and is right back at it..
it's gotten to where someone needs to get a perma ban put on that IP address. It's vandalism at this point. I don't know if you have that ability or can get in contact with someone who does, but it's really time. Forescore68 (talk) 16:15, 13 June 2009 (UTC)
- Oh, and thanks for cleaning up my Chuandongocoelurus mess...I did it in a huffy. Glad I don't lose points in this forum for being hasty and dumb...Forescore68 (talk) 02:33, 18 June 2009 (UTC)
Italictitle templateHi, Firs;
I just found out something useful about the italictitle template: I already knew that if it is put at the top, it prevents the uppermost [edit] bracket from showing. However, if it's put below the taxobox, as Bob did at Pteranodon and I just did with Allosaurus, it doesn't interfere. I don't know if this has editing drawbacks, but it's very good to know we can get back the edit bracket for the lede section, especially for ginormous articles. J. Spencer (talk) 01:35, 17 June 2009 (UTC)
- Hey!
- I didn't realize it prevents the uppermost edit link from showing. We might want to bring this up at tree of life. Either this should be fixed through the template itself, or I could possibly AWB it; I think there is a pretty easy way to delete the template name while substituting the same template name immediately below the taxobox. If this is acceptable to you (and everyone else who works in these areas), I could work on this tomorrow. Thanks for catching this. Firsfron of Ronchester 06:17, 17 June 2009 (UTC).
- P.S. Also, I'd like to make sure I interpreted everything I've included in the article correctly. Thanks in advance! Mess around with the guy in shades all you like - don't mess around with the girl in gloves! (talk) 08:28, 26 June 2009 (UTC)
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template. Mess around with the guy in shades all you like - don't mess around with the girl in gloves! (talk) 00:41, 27 June 2009 (UTC)
- I reveiewed the DYK hook for this, and everything looks fine except that I had some minor wording changes to the hook. If you are okay with those changes, please indicate so in its DYK submission at Template talk:Did You Know#Gallardosaurus and I can approve the hook. Rlendog (talk) 02:17, 8 July 2009 (UTC)]
New hoaxHi, Firs;
Here's a new one to nail, if it's still here by the time you read this: Rorasaurus. J. Spencer (talk) 13:19, 1 July 2009 (UTC)
(I'd watch Roarasaurus too, as they may try to recreate it.) J. Spencer (talk) 13:27, 1 July 2009 (UTC)
- Thanks. I've just nuked it. Firsfron of Ronchester 13:53, 1 July 2009 (UTC)
- Yeah, I'm going to start re-inquiring about the possibility of fixing WP:DABS. As you say, if some random IP hadn't added the name to the List, you wouldn't have noticed it. That's not good. Firsfron of Ronchester 00:47, 2 July 2009 (UTC)
- It's true: DABS was just one way of catching potential hoaxes (or very short new articles that editors sometimes create), but it was nice to have that option. Firsfron of Ronchester 04:32, 2 July 2009 (UTC)
- I had no idea it would be that easy. Request, and within an hour, voila! Firsfron of Ronchester 03:21, 13 July 2009 (UTC)
Thanks...
ITN for Australovenator, Diamantinasaurus and Wintonotitan
On In the news candidates page.
--BorgQueen (talk) 20:14, 4 July 2009 (UTC)
2009 hadrosaur chewing study
- I think with any article (media or not) there is a possibility of inaccuracies; that's why we check it with other sources, which is what I did in this Leonardo case. But I respect your opinion. I guess we'll just see where the AFD goes. — Hunter Kahn (c) 17:23, 5 July 2009 (UTC)
DYK for Gallardosaurus
On DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.
Wizardman 08:51, 10 July 2009 (UTC)
HerrerasaurusHey J,
After tomorrow, I am going on a 10-day wikibreak out of state, and may not have a ton of internet access. With the assistance of a lot of folks (including you... thanks, BTW) Herrerasaurus made it to FA, but there are still grammar adjustments that an editor wants to make. Can you take a look? I'm worried I won't be able to devote (much/any) time to genuine concerns over clarity. Firsfron of Ronchester 01:39, 30 July 2009 (UTC)
Carniadactylus.
Loch Ness Monster
- I think s/he’s almost figured out what was needed. Now, if only s/he could figure out how to enter citations fully … — SpikeToronto (talk) 17:21, 14 September 2009 (UTC)
- Well, it looks like it's taken care of, which goes on the positive side in my book. Thank you for the help! J. Spencer (talk) 03:09, 15 September 2009 (UTC)
Those hadrosaurs sure liked to eat, huh?
The Original Barnstar
For substantial additions to the Hadrosaur diet article, I salute you! Abyssal (talk) 03:55, 4 October 2009 (UTC)
Fruitadens
ITN for Fruitadens
On 22 October 2009, In the news was updated with a news item that involved the article Fruitadens, which you substantially updated. If you know of another interesting news item involving a recently created or updated article, then please suggest it on the candidates page.
--BorgQueen (talk) 16:32, 22 October 2009 (UTC)
RajasaurusHi!Spencer,
Congratulations for the GA upgarde of the artcile. Also thanks.--Nvvchar (talk) 18:34, 22 October 2009 (UTC)
Eld's DeerHi! Spencer,
Thanks for the message regarding
Eld's Deer was posted by me on DYK quite some months back and accepted. Since you are an expert in Fauna, will you please advice me if I should post it for GA upgrade. Thanks.--Nvvchar (talk) 02:04, 23 October 2009 (UTC)]
Re: Rajasaurus ga-rev
New find of Dinosaurs nestling ground in IndiaHi! Spencer,
A few days back I had read the above news item in several news papers in India. I have prepared a short write up on the same for any suitable insertion in the Portal or News item. Please see here
User:Nvvchar/sandbox/Ashokan Edicts (Delhi). You may kndly edit it suitably and if it has not appeared on the News page of WP you may consider posting it as a joint news item. Thanks.--Nvvchar (talk) 05:16, 28 October 2009 (UTC)]
Ceratonykus
ScienceDirectHi J,
Do you have access to ScienceDirect? I don't want to pay $31.50 for a paper which discusses "Teleocrater", especially when I don't know how detailed the portion on "Teleocrater" is. The cladogram from their analysis is viewable here, but that doesn't give me much to work with. I figured you being you, you might subscribe to their (rather expensive) service. If not, I'll just leave "Teleo" as he is for now. Firsfron of Ronchester 04:09, 12 November 2009 (UTC)
- Thanks J. As it turns out, a reference librarian I work with has access to the paper, so I now have it. Thanks again for offering. Take care, Firsfron of Ronchester 00:25, 13 November 2009 (UTC)
"Name"?
I know the scientific name should type in Name. But i see lots of scientific name in wikipedia were type in "Name". Why?
Is that official rules that Nomen nudum, Nomen oblitum, Nomen dubium should type in "Name"? or it is just a wikipedia rules? User:Devilfish1962 01:43, 26 Nov. 2009 (UTC)
96.239.237.62Hi, Firs;
I noticed you reverted
Bayosaurus". Having fixed a string of their edits this morning, I am 99% certain that this is the latest version of an editor who was recently blocked at 96.242.198.33 (talk · contribs) for inserting false dates, locations, and other information to paleo articles, and false episodes and voice actors to television shows. Something to keep an eye on, I suppose. J. Spencer (talk) 16:21, 28 November 2009 (UTC)]
- Hi J. Thanks. I wasn't aware of that. Something else to watch out for is this. Firsfron of Ronchester 17:07, 28 November 2009 (UTC)
ThescelosaurusHey J,
It looks like the Hungarian version of Thescelosaurus has become a FA! You're making a difference, even in languages you don't speak. :) (At least, I assume you don't speak Hungarian...) Firsfron of Ronchester 05:52, 30 November 2009 (UTC)
- That's a really weird discovery. I have the 2008 archosauriform histology study at work (I left it on my desk and I'm at home now), and they still treated "Teleocrater" as if it wasn't described. Despite being undescribed, the 2008 study, too, did give a lot of detail (about half a page, as I recall), as well as some illustrations. How does something remain "undescribed" when there's that much detail? I'll take another look tomorrow, but I'm pretty sure the '08 study didn't mention a specific epithet (or I would definitely have mentioned it in the article), and it certainly didn't mention "Thecodontosaurus" alophos or alphos. Firsfron of Ronchester 05:22, 1 December 2009 (UTC)
An idea I wanted to run by you
- I'm glad you like the idea. I doubt Naish and the gang would get too involved, but where the two projects overlap, they may be willing to help. I'm gonna do some more brain storming, maybe a rough draft or two and then send the Dinolist a message. Abyssal (talk) 00:28, 3 December 2009 (UTC)
DYK for Stegomosuchus
On DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.
Materialscientist (talk) 11:44, 3 December 2009 (UTC)
Category:Cretaceous dinosaursHello J. Spencer, I have an advise about Category of Dinosaurs. At present, there are 56 articles in Category:Triassic dinosaurs, 245 articles in Category:Jurassic dinosaurs, and 617 articles in Category:Cretaceous dinosaurs.
However, Cretaceous is around 80 million years long, almost equaled to Late Triassic adding Jurassic. Besides, the Lower Cretaceous Dinosaurs group and Upper Cretaceous Dinosaurs group have obvious differences. My advise is that 「Category:Cretaceous dinosaurs」 can be divided into 「Category:Lower Cretaceous dinosaurs」 and 「Category:Upper Cretaceous dinosaurs」.
Also, I have a question about Dinosaurs in Pakistan. There seveal Dinosaurs found in Pakistan, such as:
Balochisaurus. My question is that whether Pakistan was a part of Indian-Madagascar in Cretaceous, or just a part of Asia continent. If Pakistan was a part of Indian-Madagascar, maybe the above articles should be moved into Category:Dinosaurs of India and Madagascar
hoseumou(talk) 13:59, 12 December 2009 (UTC)
Hadrosaur bipedality
- Fair enough, although I still think it shouldn't be included in the Jurassic Park article for two reasons: the work is unpublished; and perhaps more importantly, it's a bit unfair to call the JP people on it when it was perfectly legitimate to have bipedal running hadrosaurs in the 1990s. I think the page should stick to things that were known to be inaccurate or questionable at the time of production, like sizes and creative embellishments (intelligence, pretty much anything to do with Dilophosaurus, etc.). J. Spencer (talk) 04:39, 7 January 2010 (UTC)
Service awards proposal
Hello, J. Spencer/Archive 3! I noticed you display a service award, and would like to invite you to join the discussion over a proposed revamping of the awards.
If you have any opinions on the proposal, please participate in the discussion. Thanks! — the Man in Question (in question) 04:14, 8 January 2010 (UTC)
Kinkonychelys.
- Thank you very much! Oh no! It's not here!!! (talk) 08:00, 12 January 2010 (UTC)
- Hi again! Following your suggestions, I've gotten the page's main content up to 1227 characters, but of course, it still falls short of the DYK requirement by nearly 300 characters. The only information I can see in the paper about the genus that can still be included is the physical descriptions of the different specimens, and personal experience tells me I'm not too handy when it comes to understanding all of the scientific words used in these descriptions. I really want this article to become a DYK article, though, and I've already seen a few facts in what's been included that might "impress the judges" substantially for inclusion in a DYK update. If it's no trouble, and if any of that information is notable for inclusion in the article, could you please help with adding it in? That would be very much appreciated! Oh no! It's not here!!! (talk) 09:58, 12 January 2010 (UTC)
- Thanks again! Oh no! It's not here!!! (talk) 23:05, 12 January 2010 (UTC)
- Thanks a million, J. Spencer!!! Oh no! It's not here!!! (talk) 00:27, 13 January 2010 (UTC)
Talk:Dinosaur archiving
Deinonychus
- Thank you! I'm not actually very familiar with IPA, but people who are set up the templates on the dinosaur articles, and since this one's been stable for a long time, I figured it was probably a gag or a test edit. J. Spencer (talk) 00:50, 21 January 2010 (UTC)
- I cannot read IPA either - I merely "sounded it out", as you might phrase it. ;) -RadicalOne•Contact Me•Chase My Tail 02:44, 21 January 2010 (UTC)
WikiProject Dinosaurs in the Signpost
Redirects and categories
- Well, it doesn't really bother me either way; it just looked funny having it on a redirect. Species of Psittacosaurus
- I added comments o how to improve the article. GamerPro64 (talk) 01:59, 5 February 2010 (UTC)]
- I sorry to bother you but did you have me give suggestions to improve the article so you can improve the it or for someone else who would want to? GamerPro64 (talk) 23:18, 6 February 2010 (UTC).
- Thank you, J. Spencer!!! Oh no! It's not here!!! (talk) 23:39, 7 February 2010 (UTC)
Reply
Rhabdognathus.
- Okay then. Thank you for the links! Oh no! It's not here!!! (talk) 07:25, 2 March 2010 (UTC)
Linheraptor.
- Thanks! Oh no! It's not here!!! (talk) 02:31, 21 March 2010 (UTC)
Guanlong imageHello,
I've uploaded some images yesterday and put them with some articles.
You said that my images weren't the kind that you're looking for.
Is this one a bit better?
Guanlong wucaii Kind regards from 82.169.6.135 (talk) 13:45, 1 April 2010 (UTC) or better known as Joerim on the Dutch Wikipedia.
Welcome back
Re: Penghusuchus
Brachi and Giraffatitan
- I am torn between keeping a tidy list at the bottom and placing them at first use. I guess the latter is simply more common, and also easier to work with once the text doesn't change much anymore. However, writing the Plateosaurus article showed me that for a total re-write a list at the end would have been better - I spent lots of time searching through the editor. So I guess I'll keep the alphabetical list, and once the text is ready for the main page I'll place the citation at the first use. HMallison (talk) 06:08, 12 May 2010 (UTC)
You're quite right to prod me - however, I must point to the sauropoda re-write, which is devloping into a physiology of dinosaurs update.... I had some rough weeks, work and kids' health wise, but hope to contribute the missing data within the next few days. Then the text will need a thorough massage - was that you vounteering??? ;) HMallison (talk) 06:45, 15 June 2010 (UTC)
- Give me a day or two more, and I'll have a rough structure ready. Then we should talk about it - may or may not be best to use your structure. HMallison (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 15:57, 16 June 2010 (UTC).
If you're into sauropods....here's a must read for you :) Long, boring, but a "deal-breaker", 'cause it has all you ever need to know and cite (I hope).
http://www3.interscience.wiley.com/cgi-bin/fulltext/123397084/HTMLSTART
PDF here:
http://www3.interscience.wiley.com/cgi-bin/fulltext/123397084/PDFSTART
HMallison (talk) 23:35, 16 May 2010 (UTC)
- well, it took me three years to understand it all - but that did involve the research, too ;) Aachenosaurus
- Dunno. I've gone ahead and semi-protected for a month. We'll see if it deters this fellow or fellows. Only the pages listed at Wikipedia:Pending changes/Testing are to be flagged for pending changes. Firsfron of Ronchester 04:10, 9 July 2010 (UTC)
Family treeHi, I'm from the Dutch Wikipedia. Because I want an article to be finished tommorow (I'm going on holliday) I needed help from someone quikly, so I come to you. Maybe you still know me from the illustration of the Guanlong. Here's the problem:
<font color="white">unnamed
<font color="white">unnamed
<font color="white">unnamed
Champsosauridae
<font color="white">unnamed
familie Simoedosauridae
<font color="white">unnamed
?
Champsosauridae
I've got two family trees. The upper one is good, but in front of it there has to be "familie Simoedosauridae", like with the second one. Can you help me, please? Kind regards from 82.169.6.135 (talk) 19:48, 14 July 2010 (UTC) or Joerim, as I'm known at the Dutch Wikipedia.
- Thank you very much! Only one thing, what mistake did I make when making one of these family trees? Kind regards from 82.169.6.135 (talk) 07:35, 15 July 2010 (UTC) or Joerim
Talkback
Concavenator imageHi, I uploaded an image to Concavenator but it was removed due to it not being anatomically rigorous. I did a new one, which is here http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Conc2.png I used this image http://images.nationalgeographic.com/wpf/media-live/photos/000/257/cache/humpback-dinosaur-life-reconstruction_25710_600x450.jpg as a model, but I don't know if mine is yet fit to be used in the article. Any help on how are images judged would be very appreciated (I also posted all this on the article's talk page but I don't know if it will get much attention there).
thank you very much
Nestor db (talk) 18:44, 10 September 2010 (UTC)
Parks ref
-
My picsHey J. Spenser on the Abelisaurus page I put those pictures up. I am wondering if there are Dinosaurs that have had most of their body discovered can I make a size comparison? Nrg800 (talk)
Thanks that makes more sense. But is that diagram that I did for the fossil finds okay? Nrg800 (talk) 06:33, 21 November 2008 (UTC)
Thank you alot for that Commons link I better get to work making a new one XD Nrg800 (talk) 07:30, 26 November 2008 (UTC)
Thanks
Azhdarch cat
Desert extinctness
Perfect!! Keep up the great work The Bald One White cat 18:45, 14 December 2008 (UTC)
Talk: List of dinosaurs
Stego distro
DYK for Peloroplites
On 24 December, 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Peloroplites, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.
BorgQueen (talk) 07:37, 24 December 2008 (UTC)
WP:DABS and 718 Bot
- Done! talk) 16:07, 17 January 2009 (UTC)]
Argentinosaurus
Pterosaurs format
- Great! :) Abyssal (talk) 00:15, 21 January 2009 (UTC)
- I tweaked the Q-Z section again so that it should look better on bigger monitors and/or higher resolutions. I haven't had a chance to look at it on my home monitor (at school now), so I thought I'd try to get some extra eyes on this until I can. Does it look any different/better/worse? Abyssal (talk) 16:08, 21 January 2009 (UTC)
- Thanks! That's what it should look like; it's what I see too. However, on the really large monitor's at my uni it actually looks wider, whereas the previous version left a big ugly gap. It looks a smidgen worse today on my monitor (and yours apparently) but it looks a heapload better that way on the monitors at school, and since people at schools form a large block of our viewers I think the tradeoff is justifiable. :) Abyssal (talk) 04:24, 22 January 2009 (UTC)
To J. Spencer
You edited what I said about Pterodactyls. While everything about them eating human babies was crap, Pterodactyl Awareness Month does exist. I have seen T-Shirts and calenders. Please revert the article. -Sabotage2595
Edmontosaurus
DYK for Akanthosuchus
On February 14, 2009, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Akanthosuchus, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.
--Dravecky (talk) 04:22, 14 February 2009 (UTC)
Birds and dinosaurs
- Yeah, every so often some well-intentioned type comes along and removes "non-avian" from a dinosaur article. It beats the incredible expanding theropods and the cartoon cameo edits. J. Spencer (talk) 23:35, 25 February 2009 (UTC)
Barnstar
The Original Barnstar
For all-around good work, I award J. Spencer this Barnstar. Keep it up!--ragesoss (talk) 00:22, 26 February 2009 (UTC)
No lapsus calami in poposauridae?
Thanks
Dibothrosuchus
- Done! talk) 19:49, 7 March 2009 (UTC)
DYK for Miragaia (dinosaur)
On Miragaia (dinosaur), which you recently nominated. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.
Royalbroil 02:11, 6 March 2009 (UTC)
Edmontosaurus
DYK for Phyllodontosuchus
On March 9, 2009, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Phyllodontosuchus, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.
Shubinator (talk) 00:23, 9 March 2009 (UTC)
DYK for Dibothrosuchus
On March 12, 2009, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Dibothrosuchus, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.
Congratulations! PeterSymonds (talk) 22:13, 12 March 2009 (UTC)
Edmontosaurus
The entire article needs its prose reviewed; I merely listed items from the lead for starters. Regarding the use of animal: it's good to state the obvious, it's an easy-to-grasp non-jargon-y word, and it saves you from having to say the animal's name or "it" a lot. 05:01, 17 March 2009 (UTC)
DYK
Argentinosaurus againHello, I search for help about Argentinosaurus again. It seems that there are three papers about Argentinosaurus in 90s, such as:
- Appenzeller, T. 1994. Argentine dinos vie for heavyweight titles. Science 266, 1805.
- Paul, G.S. 1994. Is Garden Park home to the world’s largest known land animal? Garden Park Paleontology Society 4, 5.
- Paul, G.S. 1997. Dinosaur models: the good, the bad, and using them to estimate the mass of dinosaurs. In Wolberg, D.L., Stump, E. and Rosenberg, G.D. (eds), DinoFest International Proceedings, pp
But i can't find these papers in internet. Can you search these papers, and find out the length and weight of Argentinosaurus in these papers?
I'll be very thankful if you can help me, thanks. hoseumou 08:40, 28 March 2009 (UTC)
- Thanks you for your answer. But i have a question, it seems that [Early reconstructions estimated...] directly comes from Dinosaur Mailing List. Is that techniquely enough to be a reference? Finally, I have to say I very admired your dinosaur article, such as Edmontosaurus. :) hoseumou 07:43, 31 March 2009 (UTC)
QuinceratopsHi, Firs;
You'd better nail the article, too. J. Spencer (talk) 18:02, 24 May 2009 (UTC)
- Thanks J. The article was still redlinked when I removed it from Ceratopsidae. I'm not sure what to do about the image on Commons, File:Quinceratops 03869.JPG. Probably someone should be notified. Firsfron of Ronchester 18:15, 24 May 2009 (UTC)
- Moab man can probably be salvaged, given time (and a little TNT). Firsfron of Ronchester 19:33, 24 May 2009 (UTC)]
Piveteausaurus
RajasaurusHi! Spencer,
The following are quoated from Rjanag's talk page.
May I request you to please revisit the above article to review the tag, since another expert on the subject has edited it?--Nvvchar (talk) 09:46, 16 May 2009 (UTC)
- Hey Nvvchar, sorry it's taken me so long to get back. Anyway, it would probably be better to ask J. Spencer about this, since he's the one who did the rewriting and he's more familiar with the content. I'm sure that if he went through it it's probably all fine now, but I'd feel more comfortable letting him remove the tag (since he knows what the state of the article is, whereas all I can do right now is assume—and I'd rather not go through one sentence at a time, as JSpencer probably already has). rʨanaɢ talk/contribs 21:18, 30 May 2009 (UTC)
Since, as a well known expert in the field, you have edited the version of Rajasaurus after Rjanag,s tag, which was earlier also edited by a group of users of the
Dinosaurs Portal with extensive experience in this field, would you kindly consider removing the tag on the article? I am in the process of getting some pictures of Rajasuarus model erected in Lucknow India posted on the article. Thanks--Nvvchar (talk) 02:58, 31 May 2009 (UTC)]
- Thank you very much. I hope I will have opportunities in the near future on the ]
- Can you nominate this article for GA status since it is already assessed as "B" class and many of
Dinosaurs portal members like yourself and others have put in a lot of effort to improve it?--Nvvchar (talk) 15:37, 1 August 2009 (UTC)]
Heterodontosauridae
- I highly doubt that somebody would consider it OR, but it's better to be safe than sorry. Thanks for contacting the other editor, and hopefully a source can be found for it. --Happy editing! Nehrams2020 (talk • contrib) 05:04, 2 June 2009 (UTC)
Piveteau's brain probably was bigger than a walnut
- I think it's great. I think he was a scientific illustrator also; although many scientists at the time did their own illustrations, he was known for his. I tried to confirm this information to include in the article but found nothing specific. The illustrations can be included in both the dinosaur and bio articles, if you can get decent copies. If you don't get decent copies, and I have time, I can resketch at least the most important one of them if they're out of copyright. --69.226.103.13 (talk) 22:56, 2 June 2009 (UTC)
User 173.35.129.119 issues....I just undid a half dozen bad edits of his...again. He just got the temporary ban lifted and is right back at it..
it's gotten to where someone needs to get a perma ban put on that IP address. It's vandalism at this point. I don't know if you have that ability or can get in contact with someone who does, but it's really time. Forescore68 (talk) 16:15, 13 June 2009 (UTC)
- Oh, and thanks for cleaning up my Chuandongocoelurus mess...I did it in a huffy. Glad I don't lose points in this forum for being hasty and dumb...Forescore68 (talk) 02:33, 18 June 2009 (UTC)
Italictitle templateHi, Firs;
I just found out something useful about the italictitle template: I already knew that if it is put at the top, it prevents the uppermost [edit] bracket from showing. However, if it's put below the taxobox, as Bob did at Pteranodon and I just did with Allosaurus, it doesn't interfere. I don't know if this has editing drawbacks, but it's very good to know we can get back the edit bracket for the lede section, especially for ginormous articles. J. Spencer (talk) 01:35, 17 June 2009 (UTC)
- Hey!
- I didn't realize it prevents the uppermost edit link from showing. We might want to bring this up at tree of life. Either this should be fixed through the template itself, or I could possibly AWB it; I think there is a pretty easy way to delete the template name while substituting the same template name immediately below the taxobox. If this is acceptable to you (and everyone else who works in these areas), I could work on this tomorrow. Thanks for catching this. Firsfron of Ronchester 06:17, 17 June 2009 (UTC).
- P.S. Also, I'd like to make sure I interpreted everything I've included in the article correctly. Thanks in advance! Mess around with the guy in shades all you like - don't mess around with the girl in gloves! (talk) 08:28, 26 June 2009 (UTC)
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template. Mess around with the guy in shades all you like - don't mess around with the girl in gloves! (talk) 00:41, 27 June 2009 (UTC)
- I reveiewed the DYK hook for this, and everything looks fine except that I had some minor wording changes to the hook. If you are okay with those changes, please indicate so in its DYK submission at Template talk:Did You Know#Gallardosaurus and I can approve the hook. Rlendog (talk) 02:17, 8 July 2009 (UTC)]
New hoaxHi, Firs;
Here's a new one to nail, if it's still here by the time you read this: Rorasaurus. J. Spencer (talk) 13:19, 1 July 2009 (UTC)
(I'd watch Roarasaurus too, as they may try to recreate it.) J. Spencer (talk) 13:27, 1 July 2009 (UTC)
- Thanks. I've just nuked it. Firsfron of Ronchester 13:53, 1 July 2009 (UTC)
- Yeah, I'm going to start re-inquiring about the possibility of fixing WP:DABS. As you say, if some random IP hadn't added the name to the List, you wouldn't have noticed it. That's not good. Firsfron of Ronchester 00:47, 2 July 2009 (UTC)
- It's true: DABS was just one way of catching potential hoaxes (or very short new articles that editors sometimes create), but it was nice to have that option. Firsfron of Ronchester 04:32, 2 July 2009 (UTC)
- I had no idea it would be that easy. Request, and within an hour, voila! Firsfron of Ronchester 03:21, 13 July 2009 (UTC)
Thanks...
ITN for Australovenator, Diamantinasaurus and Wintonotitan
On In the news candidates page.
--BorgQueen (talk) 20:14, 4 July 2009 (UTC)
2009 hadrosaur chewing study
- I think with any article (media or not) there is a possibility of inaccuracies; that's why we check it with other sources, which is what I did in this Leonardo case. But I respect your opinion. I guess we'll just see where the AFD goes. — Hunter Kahn (c) 17:23, 5 July 2009 (UTC)
DYK for Gallardosaurus
On DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.
Wizardman 08:51, 10 July 2009 (UTC)
HerrerasaurusHey J,
After tomorrow, I am going on a 10-day wikibreak out of state, and may not have a ton of internet access. With the assistance of a lot of folks (including you... thanks, BTW) Herrerasaurus made it to FA, but there are still grammar adjustments that an editor wants to make. Can you take a look? I'm worried I won't be able to devote (much/any) time to genuine concerns over clarity. Firsfron of Ronchester 01:39, 30 July 2009 (UTC)
Carniadactylus.
Loch Ness Monster
- I think s/he’s almost figured out what was needed. Now, if only s/he could figure out how to enter citations fully … — SpikeToronto (talk) 17:21, 14 September 2009 (UTC)
- Well, it looks like it's taken care of, which goes on the positive side in my book. Thank you for the help! J. Spencer (talk) 03:09, 15 September 2009 (UTC)
Those hadrosaurs sure liked to eat, huh?
The Original Barnstar
For substantial additions to the Hadrosaur diet article, I salute you! Abyssal (talk) 03:55, 4 October 2009 (UTC)
Fruitadens
ITN for Fruitadens
On 22 October 2009, In the news was updated with a news item that involved the article Fruitadens, which you substantially updated. If you know of another interesting news item involving a recently created or updated article, then please suggest it on the candidates page.
--BorgQueen (talk) 16:32, 22 October 2009 (UTC)
RajasaurusHi!Spencer,
Congratulations for the GA upgarde of the artcile. Also thanks.--Nvvchar (talk) 18:34, 22 October 2009 (UTC)
Eld's DeerHi! Spencer,
Thanks for the message regarding
Eld's Deer was posted by me on DYK quite some months back and accepted. Since you are an expert in Fauna, will you please advice me if I should post it for GA upgrade. Thanks.--Nvvchar (talk) 02:04, 23 October 2009 (UTC)]
Re: Rajasaurus ga-rev
New find of Dinosaurs nestling ground in IndiaHi! Spencer,
A few days back I had read the above news item in several news papers in India. I have prepared a short write up on the same for any suitable insertion in the Portal or News item. Please see here
User:Nvvchar/sandbox/Ashokan Edicts (Delhi). You may kndly edit it suitably and if it has not appeared on the News page of WP you may consider posting it as a joint news item. Thanks.--Nvvchar (talk) 05:16, 28 October 2009 (UTC)]
Ceratonykus
ScienceDirectHi J,
Do you have access to ScienceDirect? I don't want to pay $31.50 for a paper which discusses "Teleocrater", especially when I don't know how detailed the portion on "Teleocrater" is. The cladogram from their analysis is viewable here, but that doesn't give me much to work with. I figured you being you, you might subscribe to their (rather expensive) service. If not, I'll just leave "Teleo" as he is for now. Firsfron of Ronchester 04:09, 12 November 2009 (UTC)
- Thanks J. As it turns out, a reference librarian I work with has access to the paper, so I now have it. Thanks again for offering. Take care, Firsfron of Ronchester 00:25, 13 November 2009 (UTC)
"Name"?
I know the scientific name should type in Name. But i see lots of scientific name in wikipedia were type in "Name". Why?
Is that official rules that Nomen nudum, Nomen oblitum, Nomen dubium should type in "Name"? or it is just a wikipedia rules? User:Devilfish1962 01:43, 26 Nov. 2009 (UTC)
96.239.237.62Hi, Firs;
I noticed you reverted
Bayosaurus". Having fixed a string of their edits this morning, I am 99% certain that this is the latest version of an editor who was recently blocked at 96.242.198.33 (talk · contribs) for inserting false dates, locations, and other information to paleo articles, and false episodes and voice actors to television shows. Something to keep an eye on, I suppose. J. Spencer (talk) 16:21, 28 November 2009 (UTC)]
- Hi J. Thanks. I wasn't aware of that. Something else to watch out for is this. Firsfron of Ronchester 17:07, 28 November 2009 (UTC)
ThescelosaurusHey J,
It looks like the Hungarian version of Thescelosaurus has become a FA! You're making a difference, even in languages you don't speak. :) (At least, I assume you don't speak Hungarian...) Firsfron of Ronchester 05:52, 30 November 2009 (UTC)
- That's a really weird discovery. I have the 2008 archosauriform histology study at work (I left it on my desk and I'm at home now), and they still treated "Teleocrater" as if it wasn't described. Despite being undescribed, the 2008 study, too, did give a lot of detail (about half a page, as I recall), as well as some illustrations. How does something remain "undescribed" when there's that much detail? I'll take another look tomorrow, but I'm pretty sure the '08 study didn't mention a specific epithet (or I would definitely have mentioned it in the article), and it certainly didn't mention "Thecodontosaurus" alophos or alphos. Firsfron of Ronchester 05:22, 1 December 2009 (UTC)
An idea I wanted to run by you
- I'm glad you like the idea. I doubt Naish and the gang would get too involved, but where the two projects overlap, they may be willing to help. I'm gonna do some more brain storming, maybe a rough draft or two and then send the Dinolist a message. Abyssal (talk) 00:28, 3 December 2009 (UTC)
DYK for Stegomosuchus
On DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.
Materialscientist (talk) 11:44, 3 December 2009 (UTC)
Category:Cretaceous dinosaursHello J. Spencer, I have an advise about Category of Dinosaurs. At present, there are 56 articles in Category:Triassic dinosaurs, 245 articles in Category:Jurassic dinosaurs, and 617 articles in Category:Cretaceous dinosaurs.
However, Cretaceous is around 80 million years long, almost equaled to Late Triassic adding Jurassic. Besides, the Lower Cretaceous Dinosaurs group and Upper Cretaceous Dinosaurs group have obvious differences. My advise is that 「Category:Cretaceous dinosaurs」 can be divided into 「Category:Lower Cretaceous dinosaurs」 and 「Category:Upper Cretaceous dinosaurs」.
Also, I have a question about Dinosaurs in Pakistan. There seveal Dinosaurs found in Pakistan, such as:
Balochisaurus. My question is that whether Pakistan was a part of Indian-Madagascar in Cretaceous, or just a part of Asia continent. If Pakistan was a part of Indian-Madagascar, maybe the above articles should be moved into Category:Dinosaurs of India and Madagascar
hoseumou(talk) 13:59, 12 December 2009 (UTC)
Hadrosaur bipedality
- Fair enough, although I still think it shouldn't be included in the Jurassic Park article for two reasons: the work is unpublished; and perhaps more importantly, it's a bit unfair to call the JP people on it when it was perfectly legitimate to have bipedal running hadrosaurs in the 1990s. I think the page should stick to things that were known to be inaccurate or questionable at the time of production, like sizes and creative embellishments (intelligence, pretty much anything to do with Dilophosaurus, etc.). J. Spencer (talk) 04:39, 7 January 2010 (UTC)
Service awards proposal
Hello, J. Spencer/Archive 3! I noticed you display a service award, and would like to invite you to join the discussion over a proposed revamping of the awards.
If you have any opinions on the proposal, please participate in the discussion. Thanks! — the Man in Question (in question) 04:14, 8 January 2010 (UTC)
Kinkonychelys.
- Thank you very much! Oh no! It's not here!!! (talk) 08:00, 12 January 2010 (UTC)
- Hi again! Following your suggestions, I've gotten the page's main content up to 1227 characters, but of course, it still falls short of the DYK requirement by nearly 300 characters. The only information I can see in the paper about the genus that can still be included is the physical descriptions of the different specimens, and personal experience tells me I'm not too handy when it comes to understanding all of the scientific words used in these descriptions. I really want this article to become a DYK article, though, and I've already seen a few facts in what's been included that might "impress the judges" substantially for inclusion in a DYK update. If it's no trouble, and if any of that information is notable for inclusion in the article, could you please help with adding it in? That would be very much appreciated! Oh no! It's not here!!! (talk) 09:58, 12 January 2010 (UTC)
- Thanks again! Oh no! It's not here!!! (talk) 23:05, 12 January 2010 (UTC)
- Thanks a million, J. Spencer!!! Oh no! It's not here!!! (talk) 00:27, 13 January 2010 (UTC)
Talk:Dinosaur archiving
Deinonychus
- Thank you! I'm not actually very familiar with IPA, but people who are set up the templates on the dinosaur articles, and since this one's been stable for a long time, I figured it was probably a gag or a test edit. J. Spencer (talk) 00:50, 21 January 2010 (UTC)
- I cannot read IPA either - I merely "sounded it out", as you might phrase it. ;) -RadicalOne•Contact Me•Chase My Tail 02:44, 21 January 2010 (UTC)
WikiProject Dinosaurs in the Signpost
Redirects and categories
- Well, it doesn't really bother me either way; it just looked funny having it on a redirect. Species of Psittacosaurus
- I added comments o how to improve the article. GamerPro64 (talk) 01:59, 5 February 2010 (UTC)]
- I sorry to bother you but did you have me give suggestions to improve the article so you can improve the it or for someone else who would want to? GamerPro64 (talk) 23:18, 6 February 2010 (UTC).
- Thank you, J. Spencer!!! Oh no! It's not here!!! (talk) 23:39, 7 February 2010 (UTC)
Reply
Rhabdognathus.
- Okay then. Thank you for the links! Oh no! It's not here!!! (talk) 07:25, 2 March 2010 (UTC)
Linheraptor.
- Thanks! Oh no! It's not here!!! (talk) 02:31, 21 March 2010 (UTC)
Guanlong imageHello,
I've uploaded some images yesterday and put them with some articles.
You said that my images weren't the kind that you're looking for.
Is this one a bit better?
Guanlong wucaii Kind regards from 82.169.6.135 (talk) 13:45, 1 April 2010 (UTC) or better known as Joerim on the Dutch Wikipedia.
Welcome back
Re: Penghusuchus
Brachi and Giraffatitan
- I am torn between keeping a tidy list at the bottom and placing them at first use. I guess the latter is simply more common, and also easier to work with once the text doesn't change much anymore. However, writing the Plateosaurus article showed me that for a total re-write a list at the end would have been better - I spent lots of time searching through the editor. So I guess I'll keep the alphabetical list, and once the text is ready for the main page I'll place the citation at the first use. HMallison (talk) 06:08, 12 May 2010 (UTC)
You're quite right to prod me - however, I must point to the sauropoda re-write, which is devloping into a physiology of dinosaurs update.... I had some rough weeks, work and kids' health wise, but hope to contribute the missing data within the next few days. Then the text will need a thorough massage - was that you vounteering??? ;) HMallison (talk) 06:45, 15 June 2010 (UTC)
- Give me a day or two more, and I'll have a rough structure ready. Then we should talk about it - may or may not be best to use your structure. HMallison (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 15:57, 16 June 2010 (UTC).
If you're into sauropods....here's a must read for you :) Long, boring, but a "deal-breaker", 'cause it has all you ever need to know and cite (I hope).
http://www3.interscience.wiley.com/cgi-bin/fulltext/123397084/HTMLSTART
PDF here:
http://www3.interscience.wiley.com/cgi-bin/fulltext/123397084/PDFSTART
HMallison (talk) 23:35, 16 May 2010 (UTC)
- well, it took me three years to understand it all - but that did involve the research, too ;) Aachenosaurus
- Dunno. I've gone ahead and semi-protected for a month. We'll see if it deters this fellow or fellows. Only the pages listed at Wikipedia:Pending changes/Testing are to be flagged for pending changes. Firsfron of Ronchester 04:10, 9 July 2010 (UTC)
Family treeHi, I'm from the Dutch Wikipedia. Because I want an article to be finished tommorow (I'm going on holliday) I needed help from someone quikly, so I come to you. Maybe you still know me from the illustration of the Guanlong. Here's the problem:
<font color="white">unnamed
<font color="white">unnamed
<font color="white">unnamed
Champsosauridae
<font color="white">unnamed
familie Simoedosauridae
<font color="white">unnamed
?
Champsosauridae
I've got two family trees. The upper one is good, but in front of it there has to be "familie Simoedosauridae", like with the second one. Can you help me, please? Kind regards from 82.169.6.135 (talk) 19:48, 14 July 2010 (UTC) or Joerim, as I'm known at the Dutch Wikipedia.
- Thank you very much! Only one thing, what mistake did I make when making one of these family trees? Kind regards from 82.169.6.135 (talk) 07:35, 15 July 2010 (UTC) or Joerim
Talkback
Concavenator imageHi, I uploaded an image to Concavenator but it was removed due to it not being anatomically rigorous. I did a new one, which is here http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Conc2.png I used this image http://images.nationalgeographic.com/wpf/media-live/photos/000/257/cache/humpback-dinosaur-life-reconstruction_25710_600x450.jpg as a model, but I don't know if mine is yet fit to be used in the article. Any help on how are images judged would be very appreciated (I also posted all this on the article's talk page but I don't know if it will get much attention there).
thank you very much
Nestor db (talk) 18:44, 10 September 2010 (UTC)
Parks ref
-
Azhdarch cat
Desert extinctness
Perfect!! Keep up the great work The Bald One White cat 18:45, 14 December 2008 (UTC)
Talk: List of dinosaurs
Stego distro
DYK for Peloroplites
On 24 December, 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Peloroplites, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.
BorgQueen (talk) 07:37, 24 December 2008 (UTC)
WP:DABS and 718 Bot
- Done! talk) 16:07, 17 January 2009 (UTC)]
Argentinosaurus
Pterosaurs format
- Great! :) Abyssal (talk) 00:15, 21 January 2009 (UTC)
- I tweaked the Q-Z section again so that it should look better on bigger monitors and/or higher resolutions. I haven't had a chance to look at it on my home monitor (at school now), so I thought I'd try to get some extra eyes on this until I can. Does it look any different/better/worse? Abyssal (talk) 16:08, 21 January 2009 (UTC)
- Thanks! That's what it should look like; it's what I see too. However, on the really large monitor's at my uni it actually looks wider, whereas the previous version left a big ugly gap. It looks a smidgen worse today on my monitor (and yours apparently) but it looks a heapload better that way on the monitors at school, and since people at schools form a large block of our viewers I think the tradeoff is justifiable. :) Abyssal (talk) 04:24, 22 January 2009 (UTC)
To J. Spencer
You edited what I said about Pterodactyls. While everything about them eating human babies was crap, Pterodactyl Awareness Month does exist. I have seen T-Shirts and calenders. Please revert the article. -Sabotage2595
Edmontosaurus
DYK for Akanthosuchus
On February 14, 2009, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Akanthosuchus, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.
--Dravecky (talk) 04:22, 14 February 2009 (UTC)
Birds and dinosaurs
- Yeah, every so often some well-intentioned type comes along and removes "non-avian" from a dinosaur article. It beats the incredible expanding theropods and the cartoon cameo edits. J. Spencer (talk) 23:35, 25 February 2009 (UTC)
Barnstar
The Original Barnstar
For all-around good work, I award J. Spencer this Barnstar. Keep it up!--ragesoss (talk) 00:22, 26 February 2009 (UTC)
No lapsus calami in poposauridae?
Thanks
Dibothrosuchus
- Done! talk) 19:49, 7 March 2009 (UTC)
DYK for Miragaia (dinosaur)
On Miragaia (dinosaur), which you recently nominated. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.
Royalbroil 02:11, 6 March 2009 (UTC)
Edmontosaurus
DYK for Phyllodontosuchus
On March 9, 2009, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Phyllodontosuchus, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.
Shubinator (talk) 00:23, 9 March 2009 (UTC)
DYK for Dibothrosuchus
On March 12, 2009, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Dibothrosuchus, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.
Congratulations! PeterSymonds (talk) 22:13, 12 March 2009 (UTC)
Edmontosaurus
The entire article needs its prose reviewed; I merely listed items from the lead for starters. Regarding the use of animal: it's good to state the obvious, it's an easy-to-grasp non-jargon-y word, and it saves you from having to say the animal's name or "it" a lot. 05:01, 17 March 2009 (UTC)
DYK
Argentinosaurus againHello, I search for help about Argentinosaurus again. It seems that there are three papers about Argentinosaurus in 90s, such as:
- Appenzeller, T. 1994. Argentine dinos vie for heavyweight titles. Science 266, 1805.
- Paul, G.S. 1994. Is Garden Park home to the world’s largest known land animal? Garden Park Paleontology Society 4, 5.
- Paul, G.S. 1997. Dinosaur models: the good, the bad, and using them to estimate the mass of dinosaurs. In Wolberg, D.L., Stump, E. and Rosenberg, G.D. (eds), DinoFest International Proceedings, pp
But i can't find these papers in internet. Can you search these papers, and find out the length and weight of Argentinosaurus in these papers?
I'll be very thankful if you can help me, thanks. hoseumou 08:40, 28 March 2009 (UTC)
- Thanks you for your answer. But i have a question, it seems that [Early reconstructions estimated...] directly comes from Dinosaur Mailing List. Is that techniquely enough to be a reference? Finally, I have to say I very admired your dinosaur article, such as Edmontosaurus. :) hoseumou 07:43, 31 March 2009 (UTC)
QuinceratopsHi, Firs;
You'd better nail the article, too. J. Spencer (talk) 18:02, 24 May 2009 (UTC)
- Thanks J. The article was still redlinked when I removed it from Ceratopsidae. I'm not sure what to do about the image on Commons, File:Quinceratops 03869.JPG. Probably someone should be notified. Firsfron of Ronchester 18:15, 24 May 2009 (UTC)
- Moab man can probably be salvaged, given time (and a little TNT). Firsfron of Ronchester 19:33, 24 May 2009 (UTC)]
Piveteausaurus
RajasaurusHi! Spencer,
The following are quoated from Rjanag's talk page.
May I request you to please revisit the above article to review the tag, since another expert on the subject has edited it?--Nvvchar (talk) 09:46, 16 May 2009 (UTC)
- Hey Nvvchar, sorry it's taken me so long to get back. Anyway, it would probably be better to ask J. Spencer about this, since he's the one who did the rewriting and he's more familiar with the content. I'm sure that if he went through it it's probably all fine now, but I'd feel more comfortable letting him remove the tag (since he knows what the state of the article is, whereas all I can do right now is assume—and I'd rather not go through one sentence at a time, as JSpencer probably already has). rʨanaɢ talk/contribs 21:18, 30 May 2009 (UTC)
Since, as a well known expert in the field, you have edited the version of Rajasaurus after Rjanag,s tag, which was earlier also edited by a group of users of the
Dinosaurs Portal with extensive experience in this field, would you kindly consider removing the tag on the article? I am in the process of getting some pictures of Rajasuarus model erected in Lucknow India posted on the article. Thanks--Nvvchar (talk) 02:58, 31 May 2009 (UTC)]
- Thank you very much. I hope I will have opportunities in the near future on the ]
- Can you nominate this article for GA status since it is already assessed as "B" class and many of
Dinosaurs portal members like yourself and others have put in a lot of effort to improve it?--Nvvchar (talk) 15:37, 1 August 2009 (UTC)]
Heterodontosauridae
- I highly doubt that somebody would consider it OR, but it's better to be safe than sorry. Thanks for contacting the other editor, and hopefully a source can be found for it. --Happy editing! Nehrams2020 (talk • contrib) 05:04, 2 June 2009 (UTC)
Piveteau's brain probably was bigger than a walnut
- I think it's great. I think he was a scientific illustrator also; although many scientists at the time did their own illustrations, he was known for his. I tried to confirm this information to include in the article but found nothing specific. The illustrations can be included in both the dinosaur and bio articles, if you can get decent copies. If you don't get decent copies, and I have time, I can resketch at least the most important one of them if they're out of copyright. --69.226.103.13 (talk) 22:56, 2 June 2009 (UTC)
User 173.35.129.119 issues....I just undid a half dozen bad edits of his...again. He just got the temporary ban lifted and is right back at it..
it's gotten to where someone needs to get a perma ban put on that IP address. It's vandalism at this point. I don't know if you have that ability or can get in contact with someone who does, but it's really time. Forescore68 (talk) 16:15, 13 June 2009 (UTC)
- Oh, and thanks for cleaning up my Chuandongocoelurus mess...I did it in a huffy. Glad I don't lose points in this forum for being hasty and dumb...Forescore68 (talk) 02:33, 18 June 2009 (UTC)
Italictitle templateHi, Firs;
I just found out something useful about the italictitle template: I already knew that if it is put at the top, it prevents the uppermost [edit] bracket from showing. However, if it's put below the taxobox, as Bob did at Pteranodon and I just did with Allosaurus, it doesn't interfere. I don't know if this has editing drawbacks, but it's very good to know we can get back the edit bracket for the lede section, especially for ginormous articles. J. Spencer (talk) 01:35, 17 June 2009 (UTC)
- Hey!
- I didn't realize it prevents the uppermost edit link from showing. We might want to bring this up at tree of life. Either this should be fixed through the template itself, or I could possibly AWB it; I think there is a pretty easy way to delete the template name while substituting the same template name immediately below the taxobox. If this is acceptable to you (and everyone else who works in these areas), I could work on this tomorrow. Thanks for catching this. Firsfron of Ronchester 06:17, 17 June 2009 (UTC).
- P.S. Also, I'd like to make sure I interpreted everything I've included in the article correctly. Thanks in advance! Mess around with the guy in shades all you like - don't mess around with the girl in gloves! (talk) 08:28, 26 June 2009 (UTC)
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template. Mess around with the guy in shades all you like - don't mess around with the girl in gloves! (talk) 00:41, 27 June 2009 (UTC)
- I reveiewed the DYK hook for this, and everything looks fine except that I had some minor wording changes to the hook. If you are okay with those changes, please indicate so in its DYK submission at Template talk:Did You Know#Gallardosaurus and I can approve the hook. Rlendog (talk) 02:17, 8 July 2009 (UTC)]
New hoaxHi, Firs;
Here's a new one to nail, if it's still here by the time you read this: Rorasaurus. J. Spencer (talk) 13:19, 1 July 2009 (UTC)
(I'd watch Roarasaurus too, as they may try to recreate it.) J. Spencer (talk) 13:27, 1 July 2009 (UTC)
- Thanks. I've just nuked it. Firsfron of Ronchester 13:53, 1 July 2009 (UTC)
- Yeah, I'm going to start re-inquiring about the possibility of fixing WP:DABS. As you say, if some random IP hadn't added the name to the List, you wouldn't have noticed it. That's not good. Firsfron of Ronchester 00:47, 2 July 2009 (UTC)
- It's true: DABS was just one way of catching potential hoaxes (or very short new articles that editors sometimes create), but it was nice to have that option. Firsfron of Ronchester 04:32, 2 July 2009 (UTC)
- I had no idea it would be that easy. Request, and within an hour, voila! Firsfron of Ronchester 03:21, 13 July 2009 (UTC)
Thanks...
ITN for Australovenator, Diamantinasaurus and Wintonotitan
On In the news candidates page.
--BorgQueen (talk) 20:14, 4 July 2009 (UTC)
2009 hadrosaur chewing study
- I think with any article (media or not) there is a possibility of inaccuracies; that's why we check it with other sources, which is what I did in this Leonardo case. But I respect your opinion. I guess we'll just see where the AFD goes. — Hunter Kahn (c) 17:23, 5 July 2009 (UTC)
DYK for Gallardosaurus
On DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.
Wizardman 08:51, 10 July 2009 (UTC)
HerrerasaurusHey J,
After tomorrow, I am going on a 10-day wikibreak out of state, and may not have a ton of internet access. With the assistance of a lot of folks (including you... thanks, BTW) Herrerasaurus made it to FA, but there are still grammar adjustments that an editor wants to make. Can you take a look? I'm worried I won't be able to devote (much/any) time to genuine concerns over clarity. Firsfron of Ronchester 01:39, 30 July 2009 (UTC)
Carniadactylus.
Loch Ness Monster
- I think s/he’s almost figured out what was needed. Now, if only s/he could figure out how to enter citations fully … — SpikeToronto (talk) 17:21, 14 September 2009 (UTC)
- Well, it looks like it's taken care of, which goes on the positive side in my book. Thank you for the help! J. Spencer (talk) 03:09, 15 September 2009 (UTC)
Those hadrosaurs sure liked to eat, huh?
The Original Barnstar
For substantial additions to the Hadrosaur diet article, I salute you! Abyssal (talk) 03:55, 4 October 2009 (UTC)
Fruitadens
ITN for Fruitadens
On 22 October 2009, In the news was updated with a news item that involved the article Fruitadens, which you substantially updated. If you know of another interesting news item involving a recently created or updated article, then please suggest it on the candidates page.
--BorgQueen (talk) 16:32, 22 October 2009 (UTC)
RajasaurusHi!Spencer,
Congratulations for the GA upgarde of the artcile. Also thanks.--Nvvchar (talk) 18:34, 22 October 2009 (UTC)
Eld's DeerHi! Spencer,
Thanks for the message regarding
Eld's Deer was posted by me on DYK quite some months back and accepted. Since you are an expert in Fauna, will you please advice me if I should post it for GA upgrade. Thanks.--Nvvchar (talk) 02:04, 23 October 2009 (UTC)]
Re: Rajasaurus ga-rev
New find of Dinosaurs nestling ground in IndiaHi! Spencer,
A few days back I had read the above news item in several news papers in India. I have prepared a short write up on the same for any suitable insertion in the Portal or News item. Please see here
User:Nvvchar/sandbox/Ashokan Edicts (Delhi). You may kndly edit it suitably and if it has not appeared on the News page of WP you may consider posting it as a joint news item. Thanks.--Nvvchar (talk) 05:16, 28 October 2009 (UTC)]
Ceratonykus
ScienceDirectHi J,
Do you have access to ScienceDirect? I don't want to pay $31.50 for a paper which discusses "Teleocrater", especially when I don't know how detailed the portion on "Teleocrater" is. The cladogram from their analysis is viewable here, but that doesn't give me much to work with. I figured you being you, you might subscribe to their (rather expensive) service. If not, I'll just leave "Teleo" as he is for now. Firsfron of Ronchester 04:09, 12 November 2009 (UTC)
- Thanks J. As it turns out, a reference librarian I work with has access to the paper, so I now have it. Thanks again for offering. Take care, Firsfron of Ronchester 00:25, 13 November 2009 (UTC)
"Name"?
I know the scientific name should type in Name. But i see lots of scientific name in wikipedia were type in "Name". Why?
Is that official rules that Nomen nudum, Nomen oblitum, Nomen dubium should type in "Name"? or it is just a wikipedia rules? User:Devilfish1962 01:43, 26 Nov. 2009 (UTC)
96.239.237.62Hi, Firs;
I noticed you reverted
Bayosaurus". Having fixed a string of their edits this morning, I am 99% certain that this is the latest version of an editor who was recently blocked at 96.242.198.33 (talk · contribs) for inserting false dates, locations, and other information to paleo articles, and false episodes and voice actors to television shows. Something to keep an eye on, I suppose. J. Spencer (talk) 16:21, 28 November 2009 (UTC)]
- Hi J. Thanks. I wasn't aware of that. Something else to watch out for is this. Firsfron of Ronchester 17:07, 28 November 2009 (UTC)
ThescelosaurusHey J,
It looks like the Hungarian version of Thescelosaurus has become a FA! You're making a difference, even in languages you don't speak. :) (At least, I assume you don't speak Hungarian...) Firsfron of Ronchester 05:52, 30 November 2009 (UTC)
- That's a really weird discovery. I have the 2008 archosauriform histology study at work (I left it on my desk and I'm at home now), and they still treated "Teleocrater" as if it wasn't described. Despite being undescribed, the 2008 study, too, did give a lot of detail (about half a page, as I recall), as well as some illustrations. How does something remain "undescribed" when there's that much detail? I'll take another look tomorrow, but I'm pretty sure the '08 study didn't mention a specific epithet (or I would definitely have mentioned it in the article), and it certainly didn't mention "Thecodontosaurus" alophos or alphos. Firsfron of Ronchester 05:22, 1 December 2009 (UTC)
An idea I wanted to run by you
- I'm glad you like the idea. I doubt Naish and the gang would get too involved, but where the two projects overlap, they may be willing to help. I'm gonna do some more brain storming, maybe a rough draft or two and then send the Dinolist a message. Abyssal (talk) 00:28, 3 December 2009 (UTC)
DYK for Stegomosuchus
On DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.
Materialscientist (talk) 11:44, 3 December 2009 (UTC)
Category:Cretaceous dinosaursHello J. Spencer, I have an advise about Category of Dinosaurs. At present, there are 56 articles in Category:Triassic dinosaurs, 245 articles in Category:Jurassic dinosaurs, and 617 articles in Category:Cretaceous dinosaurs.
However, Cretaceous is around 80 million years long, almost equaled to Late Triassic adding Jurassic. Besides, the Lower Cretaceous Dinosaurs group and Upper Cretaceous Dinosaurs group have obvious differences. My advise is that 「Category:Cretaceous dinosaurs」 can be divided into 「Category:Lower Cretaceous dinosaurs」 and 「Category:Upper Cretaceous dinosaurs」.
Also, I have a question about Dinosaurs in Pakistan. There seveal Dinosaurs found in Pakistan, such as:
Balochisaurus. My question is that whether Pakistan was a part of Indian-Madagascar in Cretaceous, or just a part of Asia continent. If Pakistan was a part of Indian-Madagascar, maybe the above articles should be moved into Category:Dinosaurs of India and Madagascar
hoseumou(talk) 13:59, 12 December 2009 (UTC)
Hadrosaur bipedality
- Fair enough, although I still think it shouldn't be included in the Jurassic Park article for two reasons: the work is unpublished; and perhaps more importantly, it's a bit unfair to call the JP people on it when it was perfectly legitimate to have bipedal running hadrosaurs in the 1990s. I think the page should stick to things that were known to be inaccurate or questionable at the time of production, like sizes and creative embellishments (intelligence, pretty much anything to do with Dilophosaurus, etc.). J. Spencer (talk) 04:39, 7 January 2010 (UTC)
Service awards proposal
Hello, J. Spencer/Archive 3! I noticed you display a service award, and would like to invite you to join the discussion over a proposed revamping of the awards.
If you have any opinions on the proposal, please participate in the discussion. Thanks! — the Man in Question (in question) 04:14, 8 January 2010 (UTC)
Kinkonychelys.
- Thank you very much! Oh no! It's not here!!! (talk) 08:00, 12 January 2010 (UTC)
- Hi again! Following your suggestions, I've gotten the page's main content up to 1227 characters, but of course, it still falls short of the DYK requirement by nearly 300 characters. The only information I can see in the paper about the genus that can still be included is the physical descriptions of the different specimens, and personal experience tells me I'm not too handy when it comes to understanding all of the scientific words used in these descriptions. I really want this article to become a DYK article, though, and I've already seen a few facts in what's been included that might "impress the judges" substantially for inclusion in a DYK update. If it's no trouble, and if any of that information is notable for inclusion in the article, could you please help with adding it in? That would be very much appreciated! Oh no! It's not here!!! (talk) 09:58, 12 January 2010 (UTC)
- Thanks again! Oh no! It's not here!!! (talk) 23:05, 12 January 2010 (UTC)
- Thanks a million, J. Spencer!!! Oh no! It's not here!!! (talk) 00:27, 13 January 2010 (UTC)
Talk:Dinosaur archiving
Deinonychus
- Thank you! I'm not actually very familiar with IPA, but people who are set up the templates on the dinosaur articles, and since this one's been stable for a long time, I figured it was probably a gag or a test edit. J. Spencer (talk) 00:50, 21 January 2010 (UTC)
- I cannot read IPA either - I merely "sounded it out", as you might phrase it. ;) -RadicalOne•Contact Me•Chase My Tail 02:44, 21 January 2010 (UTC)
WikiProject Dinosaurs in the Signpost
Redirects and categories
- Well, it doesn't really bother me either way; it just looked funny having it on a redirect. Species of Psittacosaurus
- I added comments o how to improve the article. GamerPro64 (talk) 01:59, 5 February 2010 (UTC)]
- I sorry to bother you but did you have me give suggestions to improve the article so you can improve the it or for someone else who would want to? GamerPro64 (talk) 23:18, 6 February 2010 (UTC).
- Thank you, J. Spencer!!! Oh no! It's not here!!! (talk) 23:39, 7 February 2010 (UTC)
Reply
Rhabdognathus.
- Okay then. Thank you for the links! Oh no! It's not here!!! (talk) 07:25, 2 March 2010 (UTC)
Linheraptor.
- Thanks! Oh no! It's not here!!! (talk) 02:31, 21 March 2010 (UTC)
Guanlong imageHello,
I've uploaded some images yesterday and put them with some articles.
You said that my images weren't the kind that you're looking for.
Is this one a bit better?
Guanlong wucaii Kind regards from 82.169.6.135 (talk) 13:45, 1 April 2010 (UTC) or better known as Joerim on the Dutch Wikipedia.
Welcome back
Re: Penghusuchus
Brachi and Giraffatitan
- I am torn between keeping a tidy list at the bottom and placing them at first use. I guess the latter is simply more common, and also easier to work with once the text doesn't change much anymore. However, writing the Plateosaurus article showed me that for a total re-write a list at the end would have been better - I spent lots of time searching through the editor. So I guess I'll keep the alphabetical list, and once the text is ready for the main page I'll place the citation at the first use. HMallison (talk) 06:08, 12 May 2010 (UTC)
You're quite right to prod me - however, I must point to the sauropoda re-write, which is devloping into a physiology of dinosaurs update.... I had some rough weeks, work and kids' health wise, but hope to contribute the missing data within the next few days. Then the text will need a thorough massage - was that you vounteering??? ;) HMallison (talk) 06:45, 15 June 2010 (UTC)
- Give me a day or two more, and I'll have a rough structure ready. Then we should talk about it - may or may not be best to use your structure. HMallison (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 15:57, 16 June 2010 (UTC).
If you're into sauropods....here's a must read for you :) Long, boring, but a "deal-breaker", 'cause it has all you ever need to know and cite (I hope).
http://www3.interscience.wiley.com/cgi-bin/fulltext/123397084/HTMLSTART
PDF here:
http://www3.interscience.wiley.com/cgi-bin/fulltext/123397084/PDFSTART
HMallison (talk) 23:35, 16 May 2010 (UTC)
- well, it took me three years to understand it all - but that did involve the research, too ;) Aachenosaurus
- Dunno. I've gone ahead and semi-protected for a month. We'll see if it deters this fellow or fellows. Only the pages listed at Wikipedia:Pending changes/Testing are to be flagged for pending changes. Firsfron of Ronchester 04:10, 9 July 2010 (UTC)
Family treeHi, I'm from the Dutch Wikipedia. Because I want an article to be finished tommorow (I'm going on holliday) I needed help from someone quikly, so I come to you. Maybe you still know me from the illustration of the Guanlong. Here's the problem:
<font color="white">unnamed
<font color="white">unnamed
<font color="white">unnamed
Champsosauridae
<font color="white">unnamed
familie Simoedosauridae
<font color="white">unnamed
?
Champsosauridae
I've got two family trees. The upper one is good, but in front of it there has to be "familie Simoedosauridae", like with the second one. Can you help me, please? Kind regards from 82.169.6.135 (talk) 19:48, 14 July 2010 (UTC) or Joerim, as I'm known at the Dutch Wikipedia.
- Thank you very much! Only one thing, what mistake did I make when making one of these family trees? Kind regards from 82.169.6.135 (talk) 07:35, 15 July 2010 (UTC) or Joerim
Talkback
Concavenator imageHi, I uploaded an image to Concavenator but it was removed due to it not being anatomically rigorous. I did a new one, which is here http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Conc2.png I used this image http://images.nationalgeographic.com/wpf/media-live/photos/000/257/cache/humpback-dinosaur-life-reconstruction_25710_600x450.jpg as a model, but I don't know if mine is yet fit to be used in the article. Any help on how are images judged would be very appreciated (I also posted all this on the article's talk page but I don't know if it will get much attention there).
thank you very much
Nestor db (talk) 18:44, 10 September 2010 (UTC)
Parks ref
-
Desert extinctness
Perfect!! Keep up the great work The Bald One White cat 18:45, 14 December 2008 (UTC)
Talk: List of dinosaurs
Stego distro
DYK for Peloroplites
On 24 December, 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Peloroplites, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.
BorgQueen (talk) 07:37, 24 December 2008 (UTC)
WP:DABS and 718 Bot
- Done! talk) 16:07, 17 January 2009 (UTC)]
Argentinosaurus
Pterosaurs format
- Great! :) Abyssal (talk) 00:15, 21 January 2009 (UTC)
- I tweaked the Q-Z section again so that it should look better on bigger monitors and/or higher resolutions. I haven't had a chance to look at it on my home monitor (at school now), so I thought I'd try to get some extra eyes on this until I can. Does it look any different/better/worse? Abyssal (talk) 16:08, 21 January 2009 (UTC)
- Thanks! That's what it should look like; it's what I see too. However, on the really large monitor's at my uni it actually looks wider, whereas the previous version left a big ugly gap. It looks a smidgen worse today on my monitor (and yours apparently) but it looks a heapload better that way on the monitors at school, and since people at schools form a large block of our viewers I think the tradeoff is justifiable. :) Abyssal (talk) 04:24, 22 January 2009 (UTC)
To J. Spencer
You edited what I said about Pterodactyls. While everything about them eating human babies was crap, Pterodactyl Awareness Month does exist. I have seen T-Shirts and calenders. Please revert the article. -Sabotage2595
Edmontosaurus
DYK for Akanthosuchus
On February 14, 2009, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Akanthosuchus, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.
--Dravecky (talk) 04:22, 14 February 2009 (UTC)
Birds and dinosaurs
- Yeah, every so often some well-intentioned type comes along and removes "non-avian" from a dinosaur article. It beats the incredible expanding theropods and the cartoon cameo edits. J. Spencer (talk) 23:35, 25 February 2009 (UTC)
Barnstar
The Original Barnstar
For all-around good work, I award J. Spencer this Barnstar. Keep it up!--ragesoss (talk) 00:22, 26 February 2009 (UTC)
No lapsus calami in poposauridae?
Thanks
Dibothrosuchus
- Done! talk) 19:49, 7 March 2009 (UTC)
DYK for Miragaia (dinosaur)
On Miragaia (dinosaur), which you recently nominated. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.
Royalbroil 02:11, 6 March 2009 (UTC)
Edmontosaurus
DYK for Phyllodontosuchus
On March 9, 2009, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Phyllodontosuchus, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.
Shubinator (talk) 00:23, 9 March 2009 (UTC)
DYK for Dibothrosuchus
On March 12, 2009, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Dibothrosuchus, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.
Congratulations! PeterSymonds (talk) 22:13, 12 March 2009 (UTC)
Edmontosaurus
The entire article needs its prose reviewed; I merely listed items from the lead for starters. Regarding the use of animal: it's good to state the obvious, it's an easy-to-grasp non-jargon-y word, and it saves you from having to say the animal's name or "it" a lot. 05:01, 17 March 2009 (UTC)
DYK
Argentinosaurus againHello, I search for help about Argentinosaurus again. It seems that there are three papers about Argentinosaurus in 90s, such as:
- Appenzeller, T. 1994. Argentine dinos vie for heavyweight titles. Science 266, 1805.
- Paul, G.S. 1994. Is Garden Park home to the world’s largest known land animal? Garden Park Paleontology Society 4, 5.
- Paul, G.S. 1997. Dinosaur models: the good, the bad, and using them to estimate the mass of dinosaurs. In Wolberg, D.L., Stump, E. and Rosenberg, G.D. (eds), DinoFest International Proceedings, pp
But i can't find these papers in internet. Can you search these papers, and find out the length and weight of Argentinosaurus in these papers?
I'll be very thankful if you can help me, thanks. hoseumou 08:40, 28 March 2009 (UTC)
- Thanks you for your answer. But i have a question, it seems that [Early reconstructions estimated...] directly comes from Dinosaur Mailing List. Is that techniquely enough to be a reference? Finally, I have to say I very admired your dinosaur article, such as Edmontosaurus. :) hoseumou 07:43, 31 March 2009 (UTC)
QuinceratopsHi, Firs;
You'd better nail the article, too. J. Spencer (talk) 18:02, 24 May 2009 (UTC)
- Thanks J. The article was still redlinked when I removed it from Ceratopsidae. I'm not sure what to do about the image on Commons, File:Quinceratops 03869.JPG. Probably someone should be notified. Firsfron of Ronchester 18:15, 24 May 2009 (UTC)
- Moab man can probably be salvaged, given time (and a little TNT). Firsfron of Ronchester 19:33, 24 May 2009 (UTC)]
Piveteausaurus
RajasaurusHi! Spencer,
The following are quoated from Rjanag's talk page.
May I request you to please revisit the above article to review the tag, since another expert on the subject has edited it?--Nvvchar (talk) 09:46, 16 May 2009 (UTC)
- Hey Nvvchar, sorry it's taken me so long to get back. Anyway, it would probably be better to ask J. Spencer about this, since he's the one who did the rewriting and he's more familiar with the content. I'm sure that if he went through it it's probably all fine now, but I'd feel more comfortable letting him remove the tag (since he knows what the state of the article is, whereas all I can do right now is assume—and I'd rather not go through one sentence at a time, as JSpencer probably already has). rʨanaɢ talk/contribs 21:18, 30 May 2009 (UTC)
Since, as a well known expert in the field, you have edited the version of Rajasaurus after Rjanag,s tag, which was earlier also edited by a group of users of the
Dinosaurs Portal with extensive experience in this field, would you kindly consider removing the tag on the article? I am in the process of getting some pictures of Rajasuarus model erected in Lucknow India posted on the article. Thanks--Nvvchar (talk) 02:58, 31 May 2009 (UTC)]
- Thank you very much. I hope I will have opportunities in the near future on the ]
- Can you nominate this article for GA status since it is already assessed as "B" class and many of
Dinosaurs portal members like yourself and others have put in a lot of effort to improve it?--Nvvchar (talk) 15:37, 1 August 2009 (UTC)]
Heterodontosauridae
- I highly doubt that somebody would consider it OR, but it's better to be safe than sorry. Thanks for contacting the other editor, and hopefully a source can be found for it. --Happy editing! Nehrams2020 (talk • contrib) 05:04, 2 June 2009 (UTC)
Piveteau's brain probably was bigger than a walnut
- I think it's great. I think he was a scientific illustrator also; although many scientists at the time did their own illustrations, he was known for his. I tried to confirm this information to include in the article but found nothing specific. The illustrations can be included in both the dinosaur and bio articles, if you can get decent copies. If you don't get decent copies, and I have time, I can resketch at least the most important one of them if they're out of copyright. --69.226.103.13 (talk) 22:56, 2 June 2009 (UTC)
User 173.35.129.119 issues....I just undid a half dozen bad edits of his...again. He just got the temporary ban lifted and is right back at it..
it's gotten to where someone needs to get a perma ban put on that IP address. It's vandalism at this point. I don't know if you have that ability or can get in contact with someone who does, but it's really time. Forescore68 (talk) 16:15, 13 June 2009 (UTC)
- Oh, and thanks for cleaning up my Chuandongocoelurus mess...I did it in a huffy. Glad I don't lose points in this forum for being hasty and dumb...Forescore68 (talk) 02:33, 18 June 2009 (UTC)
Italictitle templateHi, Firs;
I just found out something useful about the italictitle template: I already knew that if it is put at the top, it prevents the uppermost [edit] bracket from showing. However, if it's put below the taxobox, as Bob did at Pteranodon and I just did with Allosaurus, it doesn't interfere. I don't know if this has editing drawbacks, but it's very good to know we can get back the edit bracket for the lede section, especially for ginormous articles. J. Spencer (talk) 01:35, 17 June 2009 (UTC)
- Hey!
- I didn't realize it prevents the uppermost edit link from showing. We might want to bring this up at tree of life. Either this should be fixed through the template itself, or I could possibly AWB it; I think there is a pretty easy way to delete the template name while substituting the same template name immediately below the taxobox. If this is acceptable to you (and everyone else who works in these areas), I could work on this tomorrow. Thanks for catching this. Firsfron of Ronchester 06:17, 17 June 2009 (UTC).
- P.S. Also, I'd like to make sure I interpreted everything I've included in the article correctly. Thanks in advance! Mess around with the guy in shades all you like - don't mess around with the girl in gloves! (talk) 08:28, 26 June 2009 (UTC)
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template. Mess around with the guy in shades all you like - don't mess around with the girl in gloves! (talk) 00:41, 27 June 2009 (UTC)
- I reveiewed the DYK hook for this, and everything looks fine except that I had some minor wording changes to the hook. If you are okay with those changes, please indicate so in its DYK submission at Template talk:Did You Know#Gallardosaurus and I can approve the hook. Rlendog (talk) 02:17, 8 July 2009 (UTC)]
New hoaxHi, Firs;
Here's a new one to nail, if it's still here by the time you read this: Rorasaurus. J. Spencer (talk) 13:19, 1 July 2009 (UTC)
(I'd watch Roarasaurus too, as they may try to recreate it.) J. Spencer (talk) 13:27, 1 July 2009 (UTC)
- Thanks. I've just nuked it. Firsfron of Ronchester 13:53, 1 July 2009 (UTC)
- Yeah, I'm going to start re-inquiring about the possibility of fixing WP:DABS. As you say, if some random IP hadn't added the name to the List, you wouldn't have noticed it. That's not good. Firsfron of Ronchester 00:47, 2 July 2009 (UTC)
- It's true: DABS was just one way of catching potential hoaxes (or very short new articles that editors sometimes create), but it was nice to have that option. Firsfron of Ronchester 04:32, 2 July 2009 (UTC)
- I had no idea it would be that easy. Request, and within an hour, voila! Firsfron of Ronchester 03:21, 13 July 2009 (UTC)
Thanks...
ITN for Australovenator, Diamantinasaurus and Wintonotitan
On In the news candidates page.
--BorgQueen (talk) 20:14, 4 July 2009 (UTC)
2009 hadrosaur chewing study
- I think with any article (media or not) there is a possibility of inaccuracies; that's why we check it with other sources, which is what I did in this Leonardo case. But I respect your opinion. I guess we'll just see where the AFD goes. — Hunter Kahn (c) 17:23, 5 July 2009 (UTC)
DYK for Gallardosaurus
On DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.
Wizardman 08:51, 10 July 2009 (UTC)
HerrerasaurusHey J,
After tomorrow, I am going on a 10-day wikibreak out of state, and may not have a ton of internet access. With the assistance of a lot of folks (including you... thanks, BTW) Herrerasaurus made it to FA, but there are still grammar adjustments that an editor wants to make. Can you take a look? I'm worried I won't be able to devote (much/any) time to genuine concerns over clarity. Firsfron of Ronchester 01:39, 30 July 2009 (UTC)
Carniadactylus.
Loch Ness Monster
- I think s/he’s almost figured out what was needed. Now, if only s/he could figure out how to enter citations fully … — SpikeToronto (talk) 17:21, 14 September 2009 (UTC)
- Well, it looks like it's taken care of, which goes on the positive side in my book. Thank you for the help! J. Spencer (talk) 03:09, 15 September 2009 (UTC)
Those hadrosaurs sure liked to eat, huh?
The Original Barnstar
For substantial additions to the Hadrosaur diet article, I salute you! Abyssal (talk) 03:55, 4 October 2009 (UTC)
Fruitadens
ITN for Fruitadens
On 22 October 2009, In the news was updated with a news item that involved the article Fruitadens, which you substantially updated. If you know of another interesting news item involving a recently created or updated article, then please suggest it on the candidates page.
--BorgQueen (talk) 16:32, 22 October 2009 (UTC)
RajasaurusHi!Spencer,
Congratulations for the GA upgarde of the artcile. Also thanks.--Nvvchar (talk) 18:34, 22 October 2009 (UTC)
Eld's DeerHi! Spencer,
Thanks for the message regarding
Eld's Deer was posted by me on DYK quite some months back and accepted. Since you are an expert in Fauna, will you please advice me if I should post it for GA upgrade. Thanks.--Nvvchar (talk) 02:04, 23 October 2009 (UTC)]
Re: Rajasaurus ga-rev
New find of Dinosaurs nestling ground in IndiaHi! Spencer,
A few days back I had read the above news item in several news papers in India. I have prepared a short write up on the same for any suitable insertion in the Portal or News item. Please see here
User:Nvvchar/sandbox/Ashokan Edicts (Delhi). You may kndly edit it suitably and if it has not appeared on the News page of WP you may consider posting it as a joint news item. Thanks.--Nvvchar (talk) 05:16, 28 October 2009 (UTC)]
Ceratonykus
ScienceDirectHi J,
Do you have access to ScienceDirect? I don't want to pay $31.50 for a paper which discusses "Teleocrater", especially when I don't know how detailed the portion on "Teleocrater" is. The cladogram from their analysis is viewable here, but that doesn't give me much to work with. I figured you being you, you might subscribe to their (rather expensive) service. If not, I'll just leave "Teleo" as he is for now. Firsfron of Ronchester 04:09, 12 November 2009 (UTC)
- Thanks J. As it turns out, a reference librarian I work with has access to the paper, so I now have it. Thanks again for offering. Take care, Firsfron of Ronchester 00:25, 13 November 2009 (UTC)
"Name"?
I know the scientific name should type in Name. But i see lots of scientific name in wikipedia were type in "Name". Why?
Is that official rules that Nomen nudum, Nomen oblitum, Nomen dubium should type in "Name"? or it is just a wikipedia rules? User:Devilfish1962 01:43, 26 Nov. 2009 (UTC)
96.239.237.62Hi, Firs;
I noticed you reverted
Bayosaurus". Having fixed a string of their edits this morning, I am 99% certain that this is the latest version of an editor who was recently blocked at 96.242.198.33 (talk · contribs) for inserting false dates, locations, and other information to paleo articles, and false episodes and voice actors to television shows. Something to keep an eye on, I suppose. J. Spencer (talk) 16:21, 28 November 2009 (UTC)]
- Hi J. Thanks. I wasn't aware of that. Something else to watch out for is this. Firsfron of Ronchester 17:07, 28 November 2009 (UTC)
ThescelosaurusHey J,
It looks like the Hungarian version of Thescelosaurus has become a FA! You're making a difference, even in languages you don't speak. :) (At least, I assume you don't speak Hungarian...) Firsfron of Ronchester 05:52, 30 November 2009 (UTC)
- That's a really weird discovery. I have the 2008 archosauriform histology study at work (I left it on my desk and I'm at home now), and they still treated "Teleocrater" as if it wasn't described. Despite being undescribed, the 2008 study, too, did give a lot of detail (about half a page, as I recall), as well as some illustrations. How does something remain "undescribed" when there's that much detail? I'll take another look tomorrow, but I'm pretty sure the '08 study didn't mention a specific epithet (or I would definitely have mentioned it in the article), and it certainly didn't mention "Thecodontosaurus" alophos or alphos. Firsfron of Ronchester 05:22, 1 December 2009 (UTC)
An idea I wanted to run by you
- I'm glad you like the idea. I doubt Naish and the gang would get too involved, but where the two projects overlap, they may be willing to help. I'm gonna do some more brain storming, maybe a rough draft or two and then send the Dinolist a message. Abyssal (talk) 00:28, 3 December 2009 (UTC)
DYK for Stegomosuchus
On DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.
Materialscientist (talk) 11:44, 3 December 2009 (UTC)
Category:Cretaceous dinosaursHello J. Spencer, I have an advise about Category of Dinosaurs. At present, there are 56 articles in Category:Triassic dinosaurs, 245 articles in Category:Jurassic dinosaurs, and 617 articles in Category:Cretaceous dinosaurs.
However, Cretaceous is around 80 million years long, almost equaled to Late Triassic adding Jurassic. Besides, the Lower Cretaceous Dinosaurs group and Upper Cretaceous Dinosaurs group have obvious differences. My advise is that 「Category:Cretaceous dinosaurs」 can be divided into 「Category:Lower Cretaceous dinosaurs」 and 「Category:Upper Cretaceous dinosaurs」.
Also, I have a question about Dinosaurs in Pakistan. There seveal Dinosaurs found in Pakistan, such as:
Balochisaurus. My question is that whether Pakistan was a part of Indian-Madagascar in Cretaceous, or just a part of Asia continent. If Pakistan was a part of Indian-Madagascar, maybe the above articles should be moved into Category:Dinosaurs of India and Madagascar
hoseumou(talk) 13:59, 12 December 2009 (UTC)
Hadrosaur bipedality
- Fair enough, although I still think it shouldn't be included in the Jurassic Park article for two reasons: the work is unpublished; and perhaps more importantly, it's a bit unfair to call the JP people on it when it was perfectly legitimate to have bipedal running hadrosaurs in the 1990s. I think the page should stick to things that were known to be inaccurate or questionable at the time of production, like sizes and creative embellishments (intelligence, pretty much anything to do with Dilophosaurus, etc.). J. Spencer (talk) 04:39, 7 January 2010 (UTC)
Service awards proposal
Hello, J. Spencer/Archive 3! I noticed you display a service award, and would like to invite you to join the discussion over a proposed revamping of the awards.
If you have any opinions on the proposal, please participate in the discussion. Thanks! — the Man in Question (in question) 04:14, 8 January 2010 (UTC)
Kinkonychelys.
- Thank you very much! Oh no! It's not here!!! (talk) 08:00, 12 January 2010 (UTC)
- Hi again! Following your suggestions, I've gotten the page's main content up to 1227 characters, but of course, it still falls short of the DYK requirement by nearly 300 characters. The only information I can see in the paper about the genus that can still be included is the physical descriptions of the different specimens, and personal experience tells me I'm not too handy when it comes to understanding all of the scientific words used in these descriptions. I really want this article to become a DYK article, though, and I've already seen a few facts in what's been included that might "impress the judges" substantially for inclusion in a DYK update. If it's no trouble, and if any of that information is notable for inclusion in the article, could you please help with adding it in? That would be very much appreciated! Oh no! It's not here!!! (talk) 09:58, 12 January 2010 (UTC)
- Thanks again! Oh no! It's not here!!! (talk) 23:05, 12 January 2010 (UTC)
- Thanks a million, J. Spencer!!! Oh no! It's not here!!! (talk) 00:27, 13 January 2010 (UTC)
Talk:Dinosaur archiving
Deinonychus
- Thank you! I'm not actually very familiar with IPA, but people who are set up the templates on the dinosaur articles, and since this one's been stable for a long time, I figured it was probably a gag or a test edit. J. Spencer (talk) 00:50, 21 January 2010 (UTC)
- I cannot read IPA either - I merely "sounded it out", as you might phrase it. ;) -RadicalOne•Contact Me•Chase My Tail 02:44, 21 January 2010 (UTC)
WikiProject Dinosaurs in the Signpost
Redirects and categories
- Well, it doesn't really bother me either way; it just looked funny having it on a redirect. Species of Psittacosaurus
- I added comments o how to improve the article. GamerPro64 (talk) 01:59, 5 February 2010 (UTC)]
- I sorry to bother you but did you have me give suggestions to improve the article so you can improve the it or for someone else who would want to? GamerPro64 (talk) 23:18, 6 February 2010 (UTC).
- Thank you, J. Spencer!!! Oh no! It's not here!!! (talk) 23:39, 7 February 2010 (UTC)
Reply
Rhabdognathus.
- Okay then. Thank you for the links! Oh no! It's not here!!! (talk) 07:25, 2 March 2010 (UTC)
Linheraptor.
- Thanks! Oh no! It's not here!!! (talk) 02:31, 21 March 2010 (UTC)
Guanlong imageHello,
I've uploaded some images yesterday and put them with some articles.
You said that my images weren't the kind that you're looking for.
Is this one a bit better?
Guanlong wucaii Kind regards from 82.169.6.135 (talk) 13:45, 1 April 2010 (UTC) or better known as Joerim on the Dutch Wikipedia.
Welcome back
Re: Penghusuchus
Brachi and Giraffatitan
- I am torn between keeping a tidy list at the bottom and placing them at first use. I guess the latter is simply more common, and also easier to work with once the text doesn't change much anymore. However, writing the Plateosaurus article showed me that for a total re-write a list at the end would have been better - I spent lots of time searching through the editor. So I guess I'll keep the alphabetical list, and once the text is ready for the main page I'll place the citation at the first use. HMallison (talk) 06:08, 12 May 2010 (UTC)
You're quite right to prod me - however, I must point to the sauropoda re-write, which is devloping into a physiology of dinosaurs update.... I had some rough weeks, work and kids' health wise, but hope to contribute the missing data within the next few days. Then the text will need a thorough massage - was that you vounteering??? ;) HMallison (talk) 06:45, 15 June 2010 (UTC)
- Give me a day or two more, and I'll have a rough structure ready. Then we should talk about it - may or may not be best to use your structure. HMallison (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 15:57, 16 June 2010 (UTC).
If you're into sauropods....here's a must read for you :) Long, boring, but a "deal-breaker", 'cause it has all you ever need to know and cite (I hope).
http://www3.interscience.wiley.com/cgi-bin/fulltext/123397084/HTMLSTART
PDF here:
http://www3.interscience.wiley.com/cgi-bin/fulltext/123397084/PDFSTART
HMallison (talk) 23:35, 16 May 2010 (UTC)
- well, it took me three years to understand it all - but that did involve the research, too ;) Aachenosaurus
- Dunno. I've gone ahead and semi-protected for a month. We'll see if it deters this fellow or fellows. Only the pages listed at Wikipedia:Pending changes/Testing are to be flagged for pending changes. Firsfron of Ronchester 04:10, 9 July 2010 (UTC)
Family treeHi, I'm from the Dutch Wikipedia. Because I want an article to be finished tommorow (I'm going on holliday) I needed help from someone quikly, so I come to you. Maybe you still know me from the illustration of the Guanlong. Here's the problem:
<font color="white">unnamed
<font color="white">unnamed
<font color="white">unnamed
Champsosauridae
<font color="white">unnamed
familie Simoedosauridae
<font color="white">unnamed
?
Champsosauridae
I've got two family trees. The upper one is good, but in front of it there has to be "familie Simoedosauridae", like with the second one. Can you help me, please? Kind regards from 82.169.6.135 (talk) 19:48, 14 July 2010 (UTC) or Joerim, as I'm known at the Dutch Wikipedia.
- Thank you very much! Only one thing, what mistake did I make when making one of these family trees? Kind regards from 82.169.6.135 (talk) 07:35, 15 July 2010 (UTC) or Joerim
Talkback
Concavenator imageHi, I uploaded an image to Concavenator but it was removed due to it not being anatomically rigorous. I did a new one, which is here http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Conc2.png I used this image http://images.nationalgeographic.com/wpf/media-live/photos/000/257/cache/humpback-dinosaur-life-reconstruction_25710_600x450.jpg as a model, but I don't know if mine is yet fit to be used in the article. Any help on how are images judged would be very appreciated (I also posted all this on the article's talk page but I don't know if it will get much attention there).
thank you very much
Nestor db (talk) 18:44, 10 September 2010 (UTC)
Parks ref
-
Stego distro
DYK for Peloroplites
On 24 December, 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Peloroplites, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.
DYK for Peloroplites
BorgQueen (talk) 07:37, 24 December 2008 (UTC)
WP:DABS and 718 Bot
- Done! talk) 16:07, 17 January 2009 (UTC)]
Argentinosaurus
Pterosaurs format
- Great! :) Abyssal (talk) 00:15, 21 January 2009 (UTC)
- I tweaked the Q-Z section again so that it should look better on bigger monitors and/or higher resolutions. I haven't had a chance to look at it on my home monitor (at school now), so I thought I'd try to get some extra eyes on this until I can. Does it look any different/better/worse? Abyssal (talk) 16:08, 21 January 2009 (UTC)
- Thanks! That's what it should look like; it's what I see too. However, on the really large monitor's at my uni it actually looks wider, whereas the previous version left a big ugly gap. It looks a smidgen worse today on my monitor (and yours apparently) but it looks a heapload better that way on the monitors at school, and since people at schools form a large block of our viewers I think the tradeoff is justifiable. :) Abyssal (talk) 04:24, 22 January 2009 (UTC)
To J. Spencer
You edited what I said about Pterodactyls. While everything about them eating human babies was crap, Pterodactyl Awareness Month does exist. I have seen T-Shirts and calenders. Please revert the article. -Sabotage2595
Edmontosaurus
DYK for Akanthosuchus
On February 14, 2009, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Akanthosuchus, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.
--Dravecky (talk) 04:22, 14 February 2009 (UTC)
Birds and dinosaurs
- Yeah, every so often some well-intentioned type comes along and removes "non-avian" from a dinosaur article. It beats the incredible expanding theropods and the cartoon cameo edits. J. Spencer (talk) 23:35, 25 February 2009 (UTC)
Barnstar
The Original Barnstar
For all-around good work, I award J. Spencer this Barnstar. Keep it up!--ragesoss (talk) 00:22, 26 February 2009 (UTC)
No lapsus calami in poposauridae?
Thanks
Dibothrosuchus
- Done! talk) 19:49, 7 March 2009 (UTC)
DYK for Miragaia (dinosaur)
On Miragaia (dinosaur), which you recently nominated. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.
Royalbroil 02:11, 6 March 2009 (UTC)
Edmontosaurus
DYK for Phyllodontosuchus
On March 9, 2009, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Phyllodontosuchus, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.
Shubinator (talk) 00:23, 9 March 2009 (UTC)
DYK for Dibothrosuchus
On March 12, 2009, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Dibothrosuchus, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.
Congratulations! PeterSymonds (talk) 22:13, 12 March 2009 (UTC)
Edmontosaurus
The entire article needs its prose reviewed; I merely listed items from the lead for starters. Regarding the use of animal: it's good to state the obvious, it's an easy-to-grasp non-jargon-y word, and it saves you from having to say the animal's name or "it" a lot. 05:01, 17 March 2009 (UTC)
DYK
Argentinosaurus againHello, I search for help about Argentinosaurus again. It seems that there are three papers about Argentinosaurus in 90s, such as:
- Appenzeller, T. 1994. Argentine dinos vie for heavyweight titles. Science 266, 1805.
- Paul, G.S. 1994. Is Garden Park home to the world’s largest known land animal? Garden Park Paleontology Society 4, 5.
- Paul, G.S. 1997. Dinosaur models: the good, the bad, and using them to estimate the mass of dinosaurs. In Wolberg, D.L., Stump, E. and Rosenberg, G.D. (eds), DinoFest International Proceedings, pp
But i can't find these papers in internet. Can you search these papers, and find out the length and weight of Argentinosaurus in these papers?
I'll be very thankful if you can help me, thanks. hoseumou 08:40, 28 March 2009 (UTC)
- Thanks you for your answer. But i have a question, it seems that [Early reconstructions estimated...] directly comes from Dinosaur Mailing List. Is that techniquely enough to be a reference? Finally, I have to say I very admired your dinosaur article, such as Edmontosaurus. :) hoseumou 07:43, 31 March 2009 (UTC)
QuinceratopsHi, Firs;
You'd better nail the article, too. J. Spencer (talk) 18:02, 24 May 2009 (UTC)
- Thanks J. The article was still redlinked when I removed it from Ceratopsidae. I'm not sure what to do about the image on Commons, File:Quinceratops 03869.JPG. Probably someone should be notified. Firsfron of Ronchester 18:15, 24 May 2009 (UTC)
- Moab man can probably be salvaged, given time (and a little TNT). Firsfron of Ronchester 19:33, 24 May 2009 (UTC)]
Piveteausaurus
RajasaurusHi! Spencer,
The following are quoated from Rjanag's talk page.
May I request you to please revisit the above article to review the tag, since another expert on the subject has edited it?--Nvvchar (talk) 09:46, 16 May 2009 (UTC)
- Hey Nvvchar, sorry it's taken me so long to get back. Anyway, it would probably be better to ask J. Spencer about this, since he's the one who did the rewriting and he's more familiar with the content. I'm sure that if he went through it it's probably all fine now, but I'd feel more comfortable letting him remove the tag (since he knows what the state of the article is, whereas all I can do right now is assume—and I'd rather not go through one sentence at a time, as JSpencer probably already has). rʨanaɢ talk/contribs 21:18, 30 May 2009 (UTC)
Since, as a well known expert in the field, you have edited the version of Rajasaurus after Rjanag,s tag, which was earlier also edited by a group of users of the
Dinosaurs Portal with extensive experience in this field, would you kindly consider removing the tag on the article? I am in the process of getting some pictures of Rajasuarus model erected in Lucknow India posted on the article. Thanks--Nvvchar (talk) 02:58, 31 May 2009 (UTC)]
- Thank you very much. I hope I will have opportunities in the near future on the ]
- Can you nominate this article for GA status since it is already assessed as "B" class and many of
Dinosaurs portal members like yourself and others have put in a lot of effort to improve it?--Nvvchar (talk) 15:37, 1 August 2009 (UTC)]
Heterodontosauridae
- I highly doubt that somebody would consider it OR, but it's better to be safe than sorry. Thanks for contacting the other editor, and hopefully a source can be found for it. --Happy editing! Nehrams2020 (talk • contrib) 05:04, 2 June 2009 (UTC)
Piveteau's brain probably was bigger than a walnut
- I think it's great. I think he was a scientific illustrator also; although many scientists at the time did their own illustrations, he was known for his. I tried to confirm this information to include in the article but found nothing specific. The illustrations can be included in both the dinosaur and bio articles, if you can get decent copies. If you don't get decent copies, and I have time, I can resketch at least the most important one of them if they're out of copyright. --69.226.103.13 (talk) 22:56, 2 June 2009 (UTC)
User 173.35.129.119 issues....I just undid a half dozen bad edits of his...again. He just got the temporary ban lifted and is right back at it..
it's gotten to where someone needs to get a perma ban put on that IP address. It's vandalism at this point. I don't know if you have that ability or can get in contact with someone who does, but it's really time. Forescore68 (talk) 16:15, 13 June 2009 (UTC)
- Oh, and thanks for cleaning up my Chuandongocoelurus mess...I did it in a huffy. Glad I don't lose points in this forum for being hasty and dumb...Forescore68 (talk) 02:33, 18 June 2009 (UTC)
Italictitle templateHi, Firs;
I just found out something useful about the italictitle template: I already knew that if it is put at the top, it prevents the uppermost [edit] bracket from showing. However, if it's put below the taxobox, as Bob did at Pteranodon and I just did with Allosaurus, it doesn't interfere. I don't know if this has editing drawbacks, but it's very good to know we can get back the edit bracket for the lede section, especially for ginormous articles. J. Spencer (talk) 01:35, 17 June 2009 (UTC)
- Hey!
- I didn't realize it prevents the uppermost edit link from showing. We might want to bring this up at tree of life. Either this should be fixed through the template itself, or I could possibly AWB it; I think there is a pretty easy way to delete the template name while substituting the same template name immediately below the taxobox. If this is acceptable to you (and everyone else who works in these areas), I could work on this tomorrow. Thanks for catching this. Firsfron of Ronchester 06:17, 17 June 2009 (UTC).
- P.S. Also, I'd like to make sure I interpreted everything I've included in the article correctly. Thanks in advance! Mess around with the guy in shades all you like - don't mess around with the girl in gloves! (talk) 08:28, 26 June 2009 (UTC)
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template. Mess around with the guy in shades all you like - don't mess around with the girl in gloves! (talk) 00:41, 27 June 2009 (UTC)
- I reveiewed the DYK hook for this, and everything looks fine except that I had some minor wording changes to the hook. If you are okay with those changes, please indicate so in its DYK submission at Template talk:Did You Know#Gallardosaurus and I can approve the hook. Rlendog (talk) 02:17, 8 July 2009 (UTC)]
New hoaxHi, Firs;
Here's a new one to nail, if it's still here by the time you read this: Rorasaurus. J. Spencer (talk) 13:19, 1 July 2009 (UTC)
(I'd watch Roarasaurus too, as they may try to recreate it.) J. Spencer (talk) 13:27, 1 July 2009 (UTC)
- Thanks. I've just nuked it. Firsfron of Ronchester 13:53, 1 July 2009 (UTC)
- Yeah, I'm going to start re-inquiring about the possibility of fixing WP:DABS. As you say, if some random IP hadn't added the name to the List, you wouldn't have noticed it. That's not good. Firsfron of Ronchester 00:47, 2 July 2009 (UTC)
- It's true: DABS was just one way of catching potential hoaxes (or very short new articles that editors sometimes create), but it was nice to have that option. Firsfron of Ronchester 04:32, 2 July 2009 (UTC)
- I had no idea it would be that easy. Request, and within an hour, voila! Firsfron of Ronchester 03:21, 13 July 2009 (UTC)
Thanks...
ITN for Australovenator, Diamantinasaurus and Wintonotitan
On In the news candidates page.
--BorgQueen (talk) 20:14, 4 July 2009 (UTC)
2009 hadrosaur chewing study
- I think with any article (media or not) there is a possibility of inaccuracies; that's why we check it with other sources, which is what I did in this Leonardo case. But I respect your opinion. I guess we'll just see where the AFD goes. — Hunter Kahn (c) 17:23, 5 July 2009 (UTC)
DYK for Gallardosaurus
On DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.
Wizardman 08:51, 10 July 2009 (UTC)
HerrerasaurusHey J,
After tomorrow, I am going on a 10-day wikibreak out of state, and may not have a ton of internet access. With the assistance of a lot of folks (including you... thanks, BTW) Herrerasaurus made it to FA, but there are still grammar adjustments that an editor wants to make. Can you take a look? I'm worried I won't be able to devote (much/any) time to genuine concerns over clarity. Firsfron of Ronchester 01:39, 30 July 2009 (UTC)
Carniadactylus.
Loch Ness Monster
- I think s/he’s almost figured out what was needed. Now, if only s/he could figure out how to enter citations fully … — SpikeToronto (talk) 17:21, 14 September 2009 (UTC)
- Well, it looks like it's taken care of, which goes on the positive side in my book. Thank you for the help! J. Spencer (talk) 03:09, 15 September 2009 (UTC)
Those hadrosaurs sure liked to eat, huh?
The Original Barnstar
For substantial additions to the Hadrosaur diet article, I salute you! Abyssal (talk) 03:55, 4 October 2009 (UTC)
Fruitadens
ITN for Fruitadens
On 22 October 2009, In the news was updated with a news item that involved the article Fruitadens, which you substantially updated. If you know of another interesting news item involving a recently created or updated article, then please suggest it on the candidates page.
--BorgQueen (talk) 16:32, 22 October 2009 (UTC)
RajasaurusHi!Spencer,
Congratulations for the GA upgarde of the artcile. Also thanks.--Nvvchar (talk) 18:34, 22 October 2009 (UTC)
Eld's DeerHi! Spencer,
Thanks for the message regarding
Eld's Deer was posted by me on DYK quite some months back and accepted. Since you are an expert in Fauna, will you please advice me if I should post it for GA upgrade. Thanks.--Nvvchar (talk) 02:04, 23 October 2009 (UTC)]
Re: Rajasaurus ga-rev
New find of Dinosaurs nestling ground in IndiaHi! Spencer,
A few days back I had read the above news item in several news papers in India. I have prepared a short write up on the same for any suitable insertion in the Portal or News item. Please see here
User:Nvvchar/sandbox/Ashokan Edicts (Delhi). You may kndly edit it suitably and if it has not appeared on the News page of WP you may consider posting it as a joint news item. Thanks.--Nvvchar (talk) 05:16, 28 October 2009 (UTC)]
Ceratonykus
ScienceDirectHi J,
Do you have access to ScienceDirect? I don't want to pay $31.50 for a paper which discusses "Teleocrater", especially when I don't know how detailed the portion on "Teleocrater" is. The cladogram from their analysis is viewable here, but that doesn't give me much to work with. I figured you being you, you might subscribe to their (rather expensive) service. If not, I'll just leave "Teleo" as he is for now. Firsfron of Ronchester 04:09, 12 November 2009 (UTC)
- Thanks J. As it turns out, a reference librarian I work with has access to the paper, so I now have it. Thanks again for offering. Take care, Firsfron of Ronchester 00:25, 13 November 2009 (UTC)
"Name"?
I know the scientific name should type in Name. But i see lots of scientific name in wikipedia were type in "Name". Why?
Is that official rules that Nomen nudum, Nomen oblitum, Nomen dubium should type in "Name"? or it is just a wikipedia rules? User:Devilfish1962 01:43, 26 Nov. 2009 (UTC)
96.239.237.62Hi, Firs;
I noticed you reverted
Bayosaurus". Having fixed a string of their edits this morning, I am 99% certain that this is the latest version of an editor who was recently blocked at 96.242.198.33 (talk · contribs) for inserting false dates, locations, and other information to paleo articles, and false episodes and voice actors to television shows. Something to keep an eye on, I suppose. J. Spencer (talk) 16:21, 28 November 2009 (UTC)]
- Hi J. Thanks. I wasn't aware of that. Something else to watch out for is this. Firsfron of Ronchester 17:07, 28 November 2009 (UTC)
ThescelosaurusHey J,
It looks like the Hungarian version of Thescelosaurus has become a FA! You're making a difference, even in languages you don't speak. :) (At least, I assume you don't speak Hungarian...) Firsfron of Ronchester 05:52, 30 November 2009 (UTC)
- That's a really weird discovery. I have the 2008 archosauriform histology study at work (I left it on my desk and I'm at home now), and they still treated "Teleocrater" as if it wasn't described. Despite being undescribed, the 2008 study, too, did give a lot of detail (about half a page, as I recall), as well as some illustrations. How does something remain "undescribed" when there's that much detail? I'll take another look tomorrow, but I'm pretty sure the '08 study didn't mention a specific epithet (or I would definitely have mentioned it in the article), and it certainly didn't mention "Thecodontosaurus" alophos or alphos. Firsfron of Ronchester 05:22, 1 December 2009 (UTC)
An idea I wanted to run by you
- I'm glad you like the idea. I doubt Naish and the gang would get too involved, but where the two projects overlap, they may be willing to help. I'm gonna do some more brain storming, maybe a rough draft or two and then send the Dinolist a message. Abyssal (talk) 00:28, 3 December 2009 (UTC)
DYK for Stegomosuchus
On DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.
Materialscientist (talk) 11:44, 3 December 2009 (UTC)
Category:Cretaceous dinosaursHello J. Spencer, I have an advise about Category of Dinosaurs. At present, there are 56 articles in Category:Triassic dinosaurs, 245 articles in Category:Jurassic dinosaurs, and 617 articles in Category:Cretaceous dinosaurs.
However, Cretaceous is around 80 million years long, almost equaled to Late Triassic adding Jurassic. Besides, the Lower Cretaceous Dinosaurs group and Upper Cretaceous Dinosaurs group have obvious differences. My advise is that 「Category:Cretaceous dinosaurs」 can be divided into 「Category:Lower Cretaceous dinosaurs」 and 「Category:Upper Cretaceous dinosaurs」.
Also, I have a question about Dinosaurs in Pakistan. There seveal Dinosaurs found in Pakistan, such as:
Balochisaurus. My question is that whether Pakistan was a part of Indian-Madagascar in Cretaceous, or just a part of Asia continent. If Pakistan was a part of Indian-Madagascar, maybe the above articles should be moved into Category:Dinosaurs of India and Madagascar
hoseumou(talk) 13:59, 12 December 2009 (UTC)
Hadrosaur bipedality
- Fair enough, although I still think it shouldn't be included in the Jurassic Park article for two reasons: the work is unpublished; and perhaps more importantly, it's a bit unfair to call the JP people on it when it was perfectly legitimate to have bipedal running hadrosaurs in the 1990s. I think the page should stick to things that were known to be inaccurate or questionable at the time of production, like sizes and creative embellishments (intelligence, pretty much anything to do with Dilophosaurus, etc.). J. Spencer (talk) 04:39, 7 January 2010 (UTC)
Service awards proposal
Hello, J. Spencer/Archive 3! I noticed you display a service award, and would like to invite you to join the discussion over a proposed revamping of the awards.
If you have any opinions on the proposal, please participate in the discussion. Thanks! — the Man in Question (in question) 04:14, 8 January 2010 (UTC)
Kinkonychelys.
- Thank you very much! Oh no! It's not here!!! (talk) 08:00, 12 January 2010 (UTC)
- Hi again! Following your suggestions, I've gotten the page's main content up to 1227 characters, but of course, it still falls short of the DYK requirement by nearly 300 characters. The only information I can see in the paper about the genus that can still be included is the physical descriptions of the different specimens, and personal experience tells me I'm not too handy when it comes to understanding all of the scientific words used in these descriptions. I really want this article to become a DYK article, though, and I've already seen a few facts in what's been included that might "impress the judges" substantially for inclusion in a DYK update. If it's no trouble, and if any of that information is notable for inclusion in the article, could you please help with adding it in? That would be very much appreciated! Oh no! It's not here!!! (talk) 09:58, 12 January 2010 (UTC)
- Thanks again! Oh no! It's not here!!! (talk) 23:05, 12 January 2010 (UTC)
- Thanks a million, J. Spencer!!! Oh no! It's not here!!! (talk) 00:27, 13 January 2010 (UTC)
Talk:Dinosaur archiving
Deinonychus
- Thank you! I'm not actually very familiar with IPA, but people who are set up the templates on the dinosaur articles, and since this one's been stable for a long time, I figured it was probably a gag or a test edit. J. Spencer (talk) 00:50, 21 January 2010 (UTC)
- I cannot read IPA either - I merely "sounded it out", as you might phrase it. ;) -RadicalOne•Contact Me•Chase My Tail 02:44, 21 January 2010 (UTC)
WikiProject Dinosaurs in the Signpost
Redirects and categories
- Well, it doesn't really bother me either way; it just looked funny having it on a redirect. Species of Psittacosaurus
- I added comments o how to improve the article. GamerPro64 (talk) 01:59, 5 February 2010 (UTC)]
- I sorry to bother you but did you have me give suggestions to improve the article so you can improve the it or for someone else who would want to? GamerPro64 (talk) 23:18, 6 February 2010 (UTC).
- Thank you, J. Spencer!!! Oh no! It's not here!!! (talk) 23:39, 7 February 2010 (UTC)
Reply
Rhabdognathus.
- Okay then. Thank you for the links! Oh no! It's not here!!! (talk) 07:25, 2 March 2010 (UTC)
Linheraptor.
- Thanks! Oh no! It's not here!!! (talk) 02:31, 21 March 2010 (UTC)
Guanlong imageHello,
I've uploaded some images yesterday and put them with some articles.
You said that my images weren't the kind that you're looking for.
Is this one a bit better?
Guanlong wucaii Kind regards from 82.169.6.135 (talk) 13:45, 1 April 2010 (UTC) or better known as Joerim on the Dutch Wikipedia.
Welcome back
Re: Penghusuchus
Brachi and Giraffatitan
- I am torn between keeping a tidy list at the bottom and placing them at first use. I guess the latter is simply more common, and also easier to work with once the text doesn't change much anymore. However, writing the Plateosaurus article showed me that for a total re-write a list at the end would have been better - I spent lots of time searching through the editor. So I guess I'll keep the alphabetical list, and once the text is ready for the main page I'll place the citation at the first use. HMallison (talk) 06:08, 12 May 2010 (UTC)
You're quite right to prod me - however, I must point to the sauropoda re-write, which is devloping into a physiology of dinosaurs update.... I had some rough weeks, work and kids' health wise, but hope to contribute the missing data within the next few days. Then the text will need a thorough massage - was that you vounteering??? ;) HMallison (talk) 06:45, 15 June 2010 (UTC)
- Give me a day or two more, and I'll have a rough structure ready. Then we should talk about it - may or may not be best to use your structure. HMallison (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 15:57, 16 June 2010 (UTC).
If you're into sauropods....here's a must read for you :) Long, boring, but a "deal-breaker", 'cause it has all you ever need to know and cite (I hope).
http://www3.interscience.wiley.com/cgi-bin/fulltext/123397084/HTMLSTART
PDF here:
http://www3.interscience.wiley.com/cgi-bin/fulltext/123397084/PDFSTART
HMallison (talk) 23:35, 16 May 2010 (UTC)
- well, it took me three years to understand it all - but that did involve the research, too ;) Aachenosaurus
- Dunno. I've gone ahead and semi-protected for a month. We'll see if it deters this fellow or fellows. Only the pages listed at Wikipedia:Pending changes/Testing are to be flagged for pending changes. Firsfron of Ronchester 04:10, 9 July 2010 (UTC)
Family treeHi, I'm from the Dutch Wikipedia. Because I want an article to be finished tommorow (I'm going on holliday) I needed help from someone quikly, so I come to you. Maybe you still know me from the illustration of the Guanlong. Here's the problem:
<font color="white">unnamed
<font color="white">unnamed
<font color="white">unnamed
Champsosauridae
<font color="white">unnamed
familie Simoedosauridae
<font color="white">unnamed
?
Champsosauridae
I've got two family trees. The upper one is good, but in front of it there has to be "familie Simoedosauridae", like with the second one. Can you help me, please? Kind regards from 82.169.6.135 (talk) 19:48, 14 July 2010 (UTC) or Joerim, as I'm known at the Dutch Wikipedia.
- Thank you very much! Only one thing, what mistake did I make when making one of these family trees? Kind regards from 82.169.6.135 (talk) 07:35, 15 July 2010 (UTC) or Joerim
Talkback
Concavenator imageHi, I uploaded an image to Concavenator but it was removed due to it not being anatomically rigorous. I did a new one, which is here http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Conc2.png I used this image http://images.nationalgeographic.com/wpf/media-live/photos/000/257/cache/humpback-dinosaur-life-reconstruction_25710_600x450.jpg as a model, but I don't know if mine is yet fit to be used in the article. Any help on how are images judged would be very appreciated (I also posted all this on the article's talk page but I don't know if it will get much attention there).
thank you very much
Nestor db (talk) 18:44, 10 September 2010 (UTC)
Parks ref
-
Argentinosaurus
Pterosaurs format
- Great! :) Abyssal (talk) 00:15, 21 January 2009 (UTC)
- I tweaked the Q-Z section again so that it should look better on bigger monitors and/or higher resolutions. I haven't had a chance to look at it on my home monitor (at school now), so I thought I'd try to get some extra eyes on this until I can. Does it look any different/better/worse? Abyssal (talk) 16:08, 21 January 2009 (UTC)
- Thanks! That's what it should look like; it's what I see too. However, on the really large monitor's at my uni it actually looks wider, whereas the previous version left a big ugly gap. It looks a smidgen worse today on my monitor (and yours apparently) but it looks a heapload better that way on the monitors at school, and since people at schools form a large block of our viewers I think the tradeoff is justifiable. :) Abyssal (talk) 04:24, 22 January 2009 (UTC)
To J. Spencer
You edited what I said about Pterodactyls. While everything about them eating human babies was crap, Pterodactyl Awareness Month does exist. I have seen T-Shirts and calenders. Please revert the article. -Sabotage2595
Edmontosaurus
DYK for Akanthosuchus
On February 14, 2009, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Akanthosuchus, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.
--Dravecky (talk) 04:22, 14 February 2009 (UTC)
Birds and dinosaurs
- Yeah, every so often some well-intentioned type comes along and removes "non-avian" from a dinosaur article. It beats the incredible expanding theropods and the cartoon cameo edits. J. Spencer (talk) 23:35, 25 February 2009 (UTC)
Barnstar
The Original Barnstar
For all-around good work, I award J. Spencer this Barnstar. Keep it up!--ragesoss (talk) 00:22, 26 February 2009 (UTC)
No lapsus calami in poposauridae?
Thanks
Dibothrosuchus
- Done! talk) 19:49, 7 March 2009 (UTC)
DYK for Miragaia (dinosaur)
On Miragaia (dinosaur), which you recently nominated. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.
Royalbroil 02:11, 6 March 2009 (UTC)
Edmontosaurus
DYK for Phyllodontosuchus
On March 9, 2009, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Phyllodontosuchus, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.
Shubinator (talk) 00:23, 9 March 2009 (UTC)
DYK for Dibothrosuchus
On March 12, 2009, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Dibothrosuchus, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.
Congratulations! PeterSymonds (talk) 22:13, 12 March 2009 (UTC)
Edmontosaurus
The entire article needs its prose reviewed; I merely listed items from the lead for starters. Regarding the use of animal: it's good to state the obvious, it's an easy-to-grasp non-jargon-y word, and it saves you from having to say the animal's name or "it" a lot. 05:01, 17 March 2009 (UTC)
DYK
Argentinosaurus againHello, I search for help about Argentinosaurus again. It seems that there are three papers about Argentinosaurus in 90s, such as:
- Appenzeller, T. 1994. Argentine dinos vie for heavyweight titles. Science 266, 1805.
- Paul, G.S. 1994. Is Garden Park home to the world’s largest known land animal? Garden Park Paleontology Society 4, 5.
- Paul, G.S. 1997. Dinosaur models: the good, the bad, and using them to estimate the mass of dinosaurs. In Wolberg, D.L., Stump, E. and Rosenberg, G.D. (eds), DinoFest International Proceedings, pp
But i can't find these papers in internet. Can you search these papers, and find out the length and weight of Argentinosaurus in these papers?
I'll be very thankful if you can help me, thanks. hoseumou 08:40, 28 March 2009 (UTC)
- Thanks you for your answer. But i have a question, it seems that [Early reconstructions estimated...] directly comes from Dinosaur Mailing List. Is that techniquely enough to be a reference? Finally, I have to say I very admired your dinosaur article, such as Edmontosaurus. :) hoseumou 07:43, 31 March 2009 (UTC)
QuinceratopsHi, Firs;
You'd better nail the article, too. J. Spencer (talk) 18:02, 24 May 2009 (UTC)
- Thanks J. The article was still redlinked when I removed it from Ceratopsidae. I'm not sure what to do about the image on Commons, File:Quinceratops 03869.JPG. Probably someone should be notified. Firsfron of Ronchester 18:15, 24 May 2009 (UTC)
- Moab man can probably be salvaged, given time (and a little TNT). Firsfron of Ronchester 19:33, 24 May 2009 (UTC)]
Piveteausaurus
RajasaurusHi! Spencer,
The following are quoated from Rjanag's talk page.
May I request you to please revisit the above article to review the tag, since another expert on the subject has edited it?--Nvvchar (talk) 09:46, 16 May 2009 (UTC)
- Hey Nvvchar, sorry it's taken me so long to get back. Anyway, it would probably be better to ask J. Spencer about this, since he's the one who did the rewriting and he's more familiar with the content. I'm sure that if he went through it it's probably all fine now, but I'd feel more comfortable letting him remove the tag (since he knows what the state of the article is, whereas all I can do right now is assume—and I'd rather not go through one sentence at a time, as JSpencer probably already has). rʨanaɢ talk/contribs 21:18, 30 May 2009 (UTC)
Since, as a well known expert in the field, you have edited the version of Rajasaurus after Rjanag,s tag, which was earlier also edited by a group of users of the
Dinosaurs Portal with extensive experience in this field, would you kindly consider removing the tag on the article? I am in the process of getting some pictures of Rajasuarus model erected in Lucknow India posted on the article. Thanks--Nvvchar (talk) 02:58, 31 May 2009 (UTC)]
- Thank you very much. I hope I will have opportunities in the near future on the ]
- Can you nominate this article for GA status since it is already assessed as "B" class and many of
Dinosaurs portal members like yourself and others have put in a lot of effort to improve it?--Nvvchar (talk) 15:37, 1 August 2009 (UTC)]
Heterodontosauridae
- I highly doubt that somebody would consider it OR, but it's better to be safe than sorry. Thanks for contacting the other editor, and hopefully a source can be found for it. --Happy editing! Nehrams2020 (talk • contrib) 05:04, 2 June 2009 (UTC)
Piveteau's brain probably was bigger than a walnut
- I think it's great. I think he was a scientific illustrator also; although many scientists at the time did their own illustrations, he was known for his. I tried to confirm this information to include in the article but found nothing specific. The illustrations can be included in both the dinosaur and bio articles, if you can get decent copies. If you don't get decent copies, and I have time, I can resketch at least the most important one of them if they're out of copyright. --69.226.103.13 (talk) 22:56, 2 June 2009 (UTC)
User 173.35.129.119 issues....I just undid a half dozen bad edits of his...again. He just got the temporary ban lifted and is right back at it..
it's gotten to where someone needs to get a perma ban put on that IP address. It's vandalism at this point. I don't know if you have that ability or can get in contact with someone who does, but it's really time. Forescore68 (talk) 16:15, 13 June 2009 (UTC)
- Oh, and thanks for cleaning up my Chuandongocoelurus mess...I did it in a huffy. Glad I don't lose points in this forum for being hasty and dumb...Forescore68 (talk) 02:33, 18 June 2009 (UTC)
Italictitle templateHi, Firs;
I just found out something useful about the italictitle template: I already knew that if it is put at the top, it prevents the uppermost [edit] bracket from showing. However, if it's put below the taxobox, as Bob did at Pteranodon and I just did with Allosaurus, it doesn't interfere. I don't know if this has editing drawbacks, but it's very good to know we can get back the edit bracket for the lede section, especially for ginormous articles. J. Spencer (talk) 01:35, 17 June 2009 (UTC)
- Hey!
- I didn't realize it prevents the uppermost edit link from showing. We might want to bring this up at tree of life. Either this should be fixed through the template itself, or I could possibly AWB it; I think there is a pretty easy way to delete the template name while substituting the same template name immediately below the taxobox. If this is acceptable to you (and everyone else who works in these areas), I could work on this tomorrow. Thanks for catching this. Firsfron of Ronchester 06:17, 17 June 2009 (UTC).
- P.S. Also, I'd like to make sure I interpreted everything I've included in the article correctly. Thanks in advance! Mess around with the guy in shades all you like - don't mess around with the girl in gloves! (talk) 08:28, 26 June 2009 (UTC)
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template. Mess around with the guy in shades all you like - don't mess around with the girl in gloves! (talk) 00:41, 27 June 2009 (UTC)
- I reveiewed the DYK hook for this, and everything looks fine except that I had some minor wording changes to the hook. If you are okay with those changes, please indicate so in its DYK submission at Template talk:Did You Know#Gallardosaurus and I can approve the hook. Rlendog (talk) 02:17, 8 July 2009 (UTC)]
New hoaxHi, Firs;
Here's a new one to nail, if it's still here by the time you read this: Rorasaurus. J. Spencer (talk) 13:19, 1 July 2009 (UTC)
(I'd watch Roarasaurus too, as they may try to recreate it.) J. Spencer (talk) 13:27, 1 July 2009 (UTC)
- Thanks. I've just nuked it. Firsfron of Ronchester 13:53, 1 July 2009 (UTC)
- Yeah, I'm going to start re-inquiring about the possibility of fixing WP:DABS. As you say, if some random IP hadn't added the name to the List, you wouldn't have noticed it. That's not good. Firsfron of Ronchester 00:47, 2 July 2009 (UTC)
- It's true: DABS was just one way of catching potential hoaxes (or very short new articles that editors sometimes create), but it was nice to have that option. Firsfron of Ronchester 04:32, 2 July 2009 (UTC)
- I had no idea it would be that easy. Request, and within an hour, voila! Firsfron of Ronchester 03:21, 13 July 2009 (UTC)
Thanks...
ITN for Australovenator, Diamantinasaurus and Wintonotitan
On In the news candidates page.
--BorgQueen (talk) 20:14, 4 July 2009 (UTC)
2009 hadrosaur chewing study
- I think with any article (media or not) there is a possibility of inaccuracies; that's why we check it with other sources, which is what I did in this Leonardo case. But I respect your opinion. I guess we'll just see where the AFD goes. — Hunter Kahn (c) 17:23, 5 July 2009 (UTC)
DYK for Gallardosaurus
On DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.
Wizardman 08:51, 10 July 2009 (UTC)
HerrerasaurusHey J,
After tomorrow, I am going on a 10-day wikibreak out of state, and may not have a ton of internet access. With the assistance of a lot of folks (including you... thanks, BTW) Herrerasaurus made it to FA, but there are still grammar adjustments that an editor wants to make. Can you take a look? I'm worried I won't be able to devote (much/any) time to genuine concerns over clarity. Firsfron of Ronchester 01:39, 30 July 2009 (UTC)
Carniadactylus.
Loch Ness Monster
- I think s/he’s almost figured out what was needed. Now, if only s/he could figure out how to enter citations fully … — SpikeToronto (talk) 17:21, 14 September 2009 (UTC)
- Well, it looks like it's taken care of, which goes on the positive side in my book. Thank you for the help! J. Spencer (talk) 03:09, 15 September 2009 (UTC)
Those hadrosaurs sure liked to eat, huh?
The Original Barnstar
For substantial additions to the Hadrosaur diet article, I salute you! Abyssal (talk) 03:55, 4 October 2009 (UTC)
Fruitadens
ITN for Fruitadens
On 22 October 2009, In the news was updated with a news item that involved the article Fruitadens, which you substantially updated. If you know of another interesting news item involving a recently created or updated article, then please suggest it on the candidates page.
--BorgQueen (talk) 16:32, 22 October 2009 (UTC)
RajasaurusHi!Spencer,
Congratulations for the GA upgarde of the artcile. Also thanks.--Nvvchar (talk) 18:34, 22 October 2009 (UTC)
Eld's DeerHi! Spencer,
Thanks for the message regarding
Eld's Deer was posted by me on DYK quite some months back and accepted. Since you are an expert in Fauna, will you please advice me if I should post it for GA upgrade. Thanks.--Nvvchar (talk) 02:04, 23 October 2009 (UTC)]
Re: Rajasaurus ga-rev
New find of Dinosaurs nestling ground in IndiaHi! Spencer,
A few days back I had read the above news item in several news papers in India. I have prepared a short write up on the same for any suitable insertion in the Portal or News item. Please see here
User:Nvvchar/sandbox/Ashokan Edicts (Delhi). You may kndly edit it suitably and if it has not appeared on the News page of WP you may consider posting it as a joint news item. Thanks.--Nvvchar (talk) 05:16, 28 October 2009 (UTC)]
Ceratonykus
ScienceDirectHi J,
Do you have access to ScienceDirect? I don't want to pay $31.50 for a paper which discusses "Teleocrater", especially when I don't know how detailed the portion on "Teleocrater" is. The cladogram from their analysis is viewable here, but that doesn't give me much to work with. I figured you being you, you might subscribe to their (rather expensive) service. If not, I'll just leave "Teleo" as he is for now. Firsfron of Ronchester 04:09, 12 November 2009 (UTC)
- Thanks J. As it turns out, a reference librarian I work with has access to the paper, so I now have it. Thanks again for offering. Take care, Firsfron of Ronchester 00:25, 13 November 2009 (UTC)
"Name"?
I know the scientific name should type in Name. But i see lots of scientific name in wikipedia were type in "Name". Why?
Is that official rules that Nomen nudum, Nomen oblitum, Nomen dubium should type in "Name"? or it is just a wikipedia rules? User:Devilfish1962 01:43, 26 Nov. 2009 (UTC)
96.239.237.62Hi, Firs;
I noticed you reverted
Bayosaurus". Having fixed a string of their edits this morning, I am 99% certain that this is the latest version of an editor who was recently blocked at 96.242.198.33 (talk · contribs) for inserting false dates, locations, and other information to paleo articles, and false episodes and voice actors to television shows. Something to keep an eye on, I suppose. J. Spencer (talk) 16:21, 28 November 2009 (UTC)]
- Hi J. Thanks. I wasn't aware of that. Something else to watch out for is this. Firsfron of Ronchester 17:07, 28 November 2009 (UTC)
ThescelosaurusHey J,
It looks like the Hungarian version of Thescelosaurus has become a FA! You're making a difference, even in languages you don't speak. :) (At least, I assume you don't speak Hungarian...) Firsfron of Ronchester 05:52, 30 November 2009 (UTC)
- That's a really weird discovery. I have the 2008 archosauriform histology study at work (I left it on my desk and I'm at home now), and they still treated "Teleocrater" as if it wasn't described. Despite being undescribed, the 2008 study, too, did give a lot of detail (about half a page, as I recall), as well as some illustrations. How does something remain "undescribed" when there's that much detail? I'll take another look tomorrow, but I'm pretty sure the '08 study didn't mention a specific epithet (or I would definitely have mentioned it in the article), and it certainly didn't mention "Thecodontosaurus" alophos or alphos. Firsfron of Ronchester 05:22, 1 December 2009 (UTC)
An idea I wanted to run by you
- I'm glad you like the idea. I doubt Naish and the gang would get too involved, but where the two projects overlap, they may be willing to help. I'm gonna do some more brain storming, maybe a rough draft or two and then send the Dinolist a message. Abyssal (talk) 00:28, 3 December 2009 (UTC)
DYK for Stegomosuchus
On DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.
Materialscientist (talk) 11:44, 3 December 2009 (UTC)
Category:Cretaceous dinosaursHello J. Spencer, I have an advise about Category of Dinosaurs. At present, there are 56 articles in Category:Triassic dinosaurs, 245 articles in Category:Jurassic dinosaurs, and 617 articles in Category:Cretaceous dinosaurs.
However, Cretaceous is around 80 million years long, almost equaled to Late Triassic adding Jurassic. Besides, the Lower Cretaceous Dinosaurs group and Upper Cretaceous Dinosaurs group have obvious differences. My advise is that 「Category:Cretaceous dinosaurs」 can be divided into 「Category:Lower Cretaceous dinosaurs」 and 「Category:Upper Cretaceous dinosaurs」.
Also, I have a question about Dinosaurs in Pakistan. There seveal Dinosaurs found in Pakistan, such as:
Balochisaurus. My question is that whether Pakistan was a part of Indian-Madagascar in Cretaceous, or just a part of Asia continent. If Pakistan was a part of Indian-Madagascar, maybe the above articles should be moved into Category:Dinosaurs of India and Madagascar
hoseumou(talk) 13:59, 12 December 2009 (UTC)
Hadrosaur bipedality
- Fair enough, although I still think it shouldn't be included in the Jurassic Park article for two reasons: the work is unpublished; and perhaps more importantly, it's a bit unfair to call the JP people on it when it was perfectly legitimate to have bipedal running hadrosaurs in the 1990s. I think the page should stick to things that were known to be inaccurate or questionable at the time of production, like sizes and creative embellishments (intelligence, pretty much anything to do with Dilophosaurus, etc.). J. Spencer (talk) 04:39, 7 January 2010 (UTC)
Service awards proposal
Hello, J. Spencer/Archive 3! I noticed you display a service award, and would like to invite you to join the discussion over a proposed revamping of the awards.
If you have any opinions on the proposal, please participate in the discussion. Thanks! — the Man in Question (in question) 04:14, 8 January 2010 (UTC)
Kinkonychelys.
- Thank you very much! Oh no! It's not here!!! (talk) 08:00, 12 January 2010 (UTC)
- Hi again! Following your suggestions, I've gotten the page's main content up to 1227 characters, but of course, it still falls short of the DYK requirement by nearly 300 characters. The only information I can see in the paper about the genus that can still be included is the physical descriptions of the different specimens, and personal experience tells me I'm not too handy when it comes to understanding all of the scientific words used in these descriptions. I really want this article to become a DYK article, though, and I've already seen a few facts in what's been included that might "impress the judges" substantially for inclusion in a DYK update. If it's no trouble, and if any of that information is notable for inclusion in the article, could you please help with adding it in? That would be very much appreciated! Oh no! It's not here!!! (talk) 09:58, 12 January 2010 (UTC)
- Thanks again! Oh no! It's not here!!! (talk) 23:05, 12 January 2010 (UTC)
- Thanks a million, J. Spencer!!! Oh no! It's not here!!! (talk) 00:27, 13 January 2010 (UTC)
Talk:Dinosaur archiving
Deinonychus
- Thank you! I'm not actually very familiar with IPA, but people who are set up the templates on the dinosaur articles, and since this one's been stable for a long time, I figured it was probably a gag or a test edit. J. Spencer (talk) 00:50, 21 January 2010 (UTC)
- I cannot read IPA either - I merely "sounded it out", as you might phrase it. ;) -RadicalOne•Contact Me•Chase My Tail 02:44, 21 January 2010 (UTC)
WikiProject Dinosaurs in the Signpost
Redirects and categories
- Well, it doesn't really bother me either way; it just looked funny having it on a redirect. Species of Psittacosaurus
- I added comments o how to improve the article. GamerPro64 (talk) 01:59, 5 February 2010 (UTC)]
- I sorry to bother you but did you have me give suggestions to improve the article so you can improve the it or for someone else who would want to? GamerPro64 (talk) 23:18, 6 February 2010 (UTC).
- Thank you, J. Spencer!!! Oh no! It's not here!!! (talk) 23:39, 7 February 2010 (UTC)
Reply
Rhabdognathus.
- Okay then. Thank you for the links! Oh no! It's not here!!! (talk) 07:25, 2 March 2010 (UTC)
Linheraptor.
- Thanks! Oh no! It's not here!!! (talk) 02:31, 21 March 2010 (UTC)
Guanlong imageHello,
I've uploaded some images yesterday and put them with some articles.
You said that my images weren't the kind that you're looking for.
Is this one a bit better?
Guanlong wucaii Kind regards from 82.169.6.135 (talk) 13:45, 1 April 2010 (UTC) or better known as Joerim on the Dutch Wikipedia.
Welcome back
Re: Penghusuchus
Brachi and Giraffatitan
- I am torn between keeping a tidy list at the bottom and placing them at first use. I guess the latter is simply more common, and also easier to work with once the text doesn't change much anymore. However, writing the Plateosaurus article showed me that for a total re-write a list at the end would have been better - I spent lots of time searching through the editor. So I guess I'll keep the alphabetical list, and once the text is ready for the main page I'll place the citation at the first use. HMallison (talk) 06:08, 12 May 2010 (UTC)
You're quite right to prod me - however, I must point to the sauropoda re-write, which is devloping into a physiology of dinosaurs update.... I had some rough weeks, work and kids' health wise, but hope to contribute the missing data within the next few days. Then the text will need a thorough massage - was that you vounteering??? ;) HMallison (talk) 06:45, 15 June 2010 (UTC)
- Give me a day or two more, and I'll have a rough structure ready. Then we should talk about it - may or may not be best to use your structure. HMallison (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 15:57, 16 June 2010 (UTC).
If you're into sauropods....here's a must read for you :) Long, boring, but a "deal-breaker", 'cause it has all you ever need to know and cite (I hope).
http://www3.interscience.wiley.com/cgi-bin/fulltext/123397084/HTMLSTART
PDF here:
http://www3.interscience.wiley.com/cgi-bin/fulltext/123397084/PDFSTART
HMallison (talk) 23:35, 16 May 2010 (UTC)
- well, it took me three years to understand it all - but that did involve the research, too ;) Aachenosaurus
- Dunno. I've gone ahead and semi-protected for a month. We'll see if it deters this fellow or fellows. Only the pages listed at Wikipedia:Pending changes/Testing are to be flagged for pending changes. Firsfron of Ronchester 04:10, 9 July 2010 (UTC)
Family treeHi, I'm from the Dutch Wikipedia. Because I want an article to be finished tommorow (I'm going on holliday) I needed help from someone quikly, so I come to you. Maybe you still know me from the illustration of the Guanlong. Here's the problem:
<font color="white">unnamed
<font color="white">unnamed
<font color="white">unnamed
Champsosauridae
<font color="white">unnamed
familie Simoedosauridae
<font color="white">unnamed
?
Champsosauridae
I've got two family trees. The upper one is good, but in front of it there has to be "familie Simoedosauridae", like with the second one. Can you help me, please? Kind regards from 82.169.6.135 (talk) 19:48, 14 July 2010 (UTC) or Joerim, as I'm known at the Dutch Wikipedia.
- Thank you very much! Only one thing, what mistake did I make when making one of these family trees? Kind regards from 82.169.6.135 (talk) 07:35, 15 July 2010 (UTC) or Joerim
Talkback
Concavenator imageHi, I uploaded an image to Concavenator but it was removed due to it not being anatomically rigorous. I did a new one, which is here http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Conc2.png I used this image http://images.nationalgeographic.com/wpf/media-live/photos/000/257/cache/humpback-dinosaur-life-reconstruction_25710_600x450.jpg as a model, but I don't know if mine is yet fit to be used in the article. Any help on how are images judged would be very appreciated (I also posted all this on the article's talk page but I don't know if it will get much attention there).
thank you very much
Nestor db (talk) 18:44, 10 September 2010 (UTC)
Parks ref
-
Pterosaurs format
- Great! :) Abyssal (talk) 00:15, 21 January 2009 (UTC)
- I tweaked the Q-Z section again so that it should look better on bigger monitors and/or higher resolutions. I haven't had a chance to look at it on my home monitor (at school now), so I thought I'd try to get some extra eyes on this until I can. Does it look any different/better/worse? Abyssal (talk) 16:08, 21 January 2009 (UTC)
- Thanks! That's what it should look like; it's what I see too. However, on the really large monitor's at my uni it actually looks wider, whereas the previous version left a big ugly gap. It looks a smidgen worse today on my monitor (and yours apparently) but it looks a heapload better that way on the monitors at school, and since people at schools form a large block of our viewers I think the tradeoff is justifiable. :) Abyssal (talk) 04:24, 22 January 2009 (UTC)
To J. Spencer
You edited what I said about Pterodactyls. While everything about them eating human babies was crap, Pterodactyl Awareness Month does exist. I have seen T-Shirts and calenders. Please revert the article. -Sabotage2595
Edmontosaurus
DYK for Akanthosuchus
On February 14, 2009, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Akanthosuchus, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.
--Dravecky (talk) 04:22, 14 February 2009 (UTC)
Birds and dinosaurs
- Yeah, every so often some well-intentioned type comes along and removes "non-avian" from a dinosaur article. It beats the incredible expanding theropods and the cartoon cameo edits. J. Spencer (talk) 23:35, 25 February 2009 (UTC)
Barnstar
The Original Barnstar
For all-around good work, I award J. Spencer this Barnstar. Keep it up!--ragesoss (talk) 00:22, 26 February 2009 (UTC)
No lapsus calami in poposauridae?
Thanks
Dibothrosuchus
- Done! talk) 19:49, 7 March 2009 (UTC)
DYK for Miragaia (dinosaur)
On Miragaia (dinosaur), which you recently nominated. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.
Royalbroil 02:11, 6 March 2009 (UTC)
Edmontosaurus
DYK for Phyllodontosuchus
On March 9, 2009, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Phyllodontosuchus, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.
Shubinator (talk) 00:23, 9 March 2009 (UTC)
DYK for Dibothrosuchus
On March 12, 2009, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Dibothrosuchus, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.
Congratulations! PeterSymonds (talk) 22:13, 12 March 2009 (UTC)
Edmontosaurus
The entire article needs its prose reviewed; I merely listed items from the lead for starters. Regarding the use of animal: it's good to state the obvious, it's an easy-to-grasp non-jargon-y word, and it saves you from having to say the animal's name or "it" a lot. 05:01, 17 March 2009 (UTC)
DYK
Argentinosaurus againHello, I search for help about Argentinosaurus again. It seems that there are three papers about Argentinosaurus in 90s, such as:
- Appenzeller, T. 1994. Argentine dinos vie for heavyweight titles. Science 266, 1805.
- Paul, G.S. 1994. Is Garden Park home to the world’s largest known land animal? Garden Park Paleontology Society 4, 5.
- Paul, G.S. 1997. Dinosaur models: the good, the bad, and using them to estimate the mass of dinosaurs. In Wolberg, D.L., Stump, E. and Rosenberg, G.D. (eds), DinoFest International Proceedings, pp
But i can't find these papers in internet. Can you search these papers, and find out the length and weight of Argentinosaurus in these papers?
I'll be very thankful if you can help me, thanks. hoseumou 08:40, 28 March 2009 (UTC)
- Thanks you for your answer. But i have a question, it seems that [Early reconstructions estimated...] directly comes from Dinosaur Mailing List. Is that techniquely enough to be a reference? Finally, I have to say I very admired your dinosaur article, such as Edmontosaurus. :) hoseumou 07:43, 31 March 2009 (UTC)
QuinceratopsHi, Firs;
You'd better nail the article, too. J. Spencer (talk) 18:02, 24 May 2009 (UTC)
- Thanks J. The article was still redlinked when I removed it from Ceratopsidae. I'm not sure what to do about the image on Commons, File:Quinceratops 03869.JPG. Probably someone should be notified. Firsfron of Ronchester 18:15, 24 May 2009 (UTC)
- Moab man can probably be salvaged, given time (and a little TNT). Firsfron of Ronchester 19:33, 24 May 2009 (UTC)]
Piveteausaurus
RajasaurusHi! Spencer,
The following are quoated from Rjanag's talk page.
May I request you to please revisit the above article to review the tag, since another expert on the subject has edited it?--Nvvchar (talk) 09:46, 16 May 2009 (UTC)
- Hey Nvvchar, sorry it's taken me so long to get back. Anyway, it would probably be better to ask J. Spencer about this, since he's the one who did the rewriting and he's more familiar with the content. I'm sure that if he went through it it's probably all fine now, but I'd feel more comfortable letting him remove the tag (since he knows what the state of the article is, whereas all I can do right now is assume—and I'd rather not go through one sentence at a time, as JSpencer probably already has). rʨanaɢ talk/contribs 21:18, 30 May 2009 (UTC)
Since, as a well known expert in the field, you have edited the version of Rajasaurus after Rjanag,s tag, which was earlier also edited by a group of users of the
Dinosaurs Portal with extensive experience in this field, would you kindly consider removing the tag on the article? I am in the process of getting some pictures of Rajasuarus model erected in Lucknow India posted on the article. Thanks--Nvvchar (talk) 02:58, 31 May 2009 (UTC)]
- Thank you very much. I hope I will have opportunities in the near future on the ]
- Can you nominate this article for GA status since it is already assessed as "B" class and many of
Dinosaurs portal members like yourself and others have put in a lot of effort to improve it?--Nvvchar (talk) 15:37, 1 August 2009 (UTC)]
Heterodontosauridae
- I highly doubt that somebody would consider it OR, but it's better to be safe than sorry. Thanks for contacting the other editor, and hopefully a source can be found for it. --Happy editing! Nehrams2020 (talk • contrib) 05:04, 2 June 2009 (UTC)
Piveteau's brain probably was bigger than a walnut
- I think it's great. I think he was a scientific illustrator also; although many scientists at the time did their own illustrations, he was known for his. I tried to confirm this information to include in the article but found nothing specific. The illustrations can be included in both the dinosaur and bio articles, if you can get decent copies. If you don't get decent copies, and I have time, I can resketch at least the most important one of them if they're out of copyright. --69.226.103.13 (talk) 22:56, 2 June 2009 (UTC)
User 173.35.129.119 issues....I just undid a half dozen bad edits of his...again. He just got the temporary ban lifted and is right back at it..
it's gotten to where someone needs to get a perma ban put on that IP address. It's vandalism at this point. I don't know if you have that ability or can get in contact with someone who does, but it's really time. Forescore68 (talk) 16:15, 13 June 2009 (UTC)
- Oh, and thanks for cleaning up my Chuandongocoelurus mess...I did it in a huffy. Glad I don't lose points in this forum for being hasty and dumb...Forescore68 (talk) 02:33, 18 June 2009 (UTC)
Italictitle templateHi, Firs;
I just found out something useful about the italictitle template: I already knew that if it is put at the top, it prevents the uppermost [edit] bracket from showing. However, if it's put below the taxobox, as Bob did at Pteranodon and I just did with Allosaurus, it doesn't interfere. I don't know if this has editing drawbacks, but it's very good to know we can get back the edit bracket for the lede section, especially for ginormous articles. J. Spencer (talk) 01:35, 17 June 2009 (UTC)
- Hey!
- I didn't realize it prevents the uppermost edit link from showing. We might want to bring this up at tree of life. Either this should be fixed through the template itself, or I could possibly AWB it; I think there is a pretty easy way to delete the template name while substituting the same template name immediately below the taxobox. If this is acceptable to you (and everyone else who works in these areas), I could work on this tomorrow. Thanks for catching this. Firsfron of Ronchester 06:17, 17 June 2009 (UTC).
- P.S. Also, I'd like to make sure I interpreted everything I've included in the article correctly. Thanks in advance! Mess around with the guy in shades all you like - don't mess around with the girl in gloves! (talk) 08:28, 26 June 2009 (UTC)
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template. Mess around with the guy in shades all you like - don't mess around with the girl in gloves! (talk) 00:41, 27 June 2009 (UTC)
- I reveiewed the DYK hook for this, and everything looks fine except that I had some minor wording changes to the hook. If you are okay with those changes, please indicate so in its DYK submission at Template talk:Did You Know#Gallardosaurus and I can approve the hook. Rlendog (talk) 02:17, 8 July 2009 (UTC)]
New hoaxHi, Firs;
Here's a new one to nail, if it's still here by the time you read this: Rorasaurus. J. Spencer (talk) 13:19, 1 July 2009 (UTC)
(I'd watch Roarasaurus too, as they may try to recreate it.) J. Spencer (talk) 13:27, 1 July 2009 (UTC)
- Thanks. I've just nuked it. Firsfron of Ronchester 13:53, 1 July 2009 (UTC)
- Yeah, I'm going to start re-inquiring about the possibility of fixing WP:DABS. As you say, if some random IP hadn't added the name to the List, you wouldn't have noticed it. That's not good. Firsfron of Ronchester 00:47, 2 July 2009 (UTC)
- It's true: DABS was just one way of catching potential hoaxes (or very short new articles that editors sometimes create), but it was nice to have that option. Firsfron of Ronchester 04:32, 2 July 2009 (UTC)
- I had no idea it would be that easy. Request, and within an hour, voila! Firsfron of Ronchester 03:21, 13 July 2009 (UTC)
Thanks...
ITN for Australovenator, Diamantinasaurus and Wintonotitan
On In the news candidates page.
--BorgQueen (talk) 20:14, 4 July 2009 (UTC)
2009 hadrosaur chewing study
- I think with any article (media or not) there is a possibility of inaccuracies; that's why we check it with other sources, which is what I did in this Leonardo case. But I respect your opinion. I guess we'll just see where the AFD goes. — Hunter Kahn (c) 17:23, 5 July 2009 (UTC)
DYK for Gallardosaurus
On DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.
Wizardman 08:51, 10 July 2009 (UTC)
HerrerasaurusHey J,
After tomorrow, I am going on a 10-day wikibreak out of state, and may not have a ton of internet access. With the assistance of a lot of folks (including you... thanks, BTW) Herrerasaurus made it to FA, but there are still grammar adjustments that an editor wants to make. Can you take a look? I'm worried I won't be able to devote (much/any) time to genuine concerns over clarity. Firsfron of Ronchester 01:39, 30 July 2009 (UTC)
Carniadactylus.
Loch Ness Monster
- I think s/he’s almost figured out what was needed. Now, if only s/he could figure out how to enter citations fully … — SpikeToronto (talk) 17:21, 14 September 2009 (UTC)
- Well, it looks like it's taken care of, which goes on the positive side in my book. Thank you for the help! J. Spencer (talk) 03:09, 15 September 2009 (UTC)
Those hadrosaurs sure liked to eat, huh?
The Original Barnstar
For substantial additions to the Hadrosaur diet article, I salute you! Abyssal (talk) 03:55, 4 October 2009 (UTC)
Fruitadens
ITN for Fruitadens
On 22 October 2009, In the news was updated with a news item that involved the article Fruitadens, which you substantially updated. If you know of another interesting news item involving a recently created or updated article, then please suggest it on the candidates page.
--BorgQueen (talk) 16:32, 22 October 2009 (UTC)
RajasaurusHi!Spencer,
Congratulations for the GA upgarde of the artcile. Also thanks.--Nvvchar (talk) 18:34, 22 October 2009 (UTC)
Eld's DeerHi! Spencer,
Thanks for the message regarding
Eld's Deer was posted by me on DYK quite some months back and accepted. Since you are an expert in Fauna, will you please advice me if I should post it for GA upgrade. Thanks.--Nvvchar (talk) 02:04, 23 October 2009 (UTC)]
Re: Rajasaurus ga-rev
New find of Dinosaurs nestling ground in IndiaHi! Spencer,
A few days back I had read the above news item in several news papers in India. I have prepared a short write up on the same for any suitable insertion in the Portal or News item. Please see here
User:Nvvchar/sandbox/Ashokan Edicts (Delhi). You may kndly edit it suitably and if it has not appeared on the News page of WP you may consider posting it as a joint news item. Thanks.--Nvvchar (talk) 05:16, 28 October 2009 (UTC)]
Ceratonykus
ScienceDirectHi J,
Do you have access to ScienceDirect? I don't want to pay $31.50 for a paper which discusses "Teleocrater", especially when I don't know how detailed the portion on "Teleocrater" is. The cladogram from their analysis is viewable here, but that doesn't give me much to work with. I figured you being you, you might subscribe to their (rather expensive) service. If not, I'll just leave "Teleo" as he is for now. Firsfron of Ronchester 04:09, 12 November 2009 (UTC)
- Thanks J. As it turns out, a reference librarian I work with has access to the paper, so I now have it. Thanks again for offering. Take care, Firsfron of Ronchester 00:25, 13 November 2009 (UTC)
"Name"?
I know the scientific name should type in Name. But i see lots of scientific name in wikipedia were type in "Name". Why?
Is that official rules that Nomen nudum, Nomen oblitum, Nomen dubium should type in "Name"? or it is just a wikipedia rules? User:Devilfish1962 01:43, 26 Nov. 2009 (UTC)
96.239.237.62Hi, Firs;
I noticed you reverted
Bayosaurus". Having fixed a string of their edits this morning, I am 99% certain that this is the latest version of an editor who was recently blocked at 96.242.198.33 (talk · contribs) for inserting false dates, locations, and other information to paleo articles, and false episodes and voice actors to television shows. Something to keep an eye on, I suppose. J. Spencer (talk) 16:21, 28 November 2009 (UTC)]
- Hi J. Thanks. I wasn't aware of that. Something else to watch out for is this. Firsfron of Ronchester 17:07, 28 November 2009 (UTC)
ThescelosaurusHey J,
It looks like the Hungarian version of Thescelosaurus has become a FA! You're making a difference, even in languages you don't speak. :) (At least, I assume you don't speak Hungarian...) Firsfron of Ronchester 05:52, 30 November 2009 (UTC)
- That's a really weird discovery. I have the 2008 archosauriform histology study at work (I left it on my desk and I'm at home now), and they still treated "Teleocrater" as if it wasn't described. Despite being undescribed, the 2008 study, too, did give a lot of detail (about half a page, as I recall), as well as some illustrations. How does something remain "undescribed" when there's that much detail? I'll take another look tomorrow, but I'm pretty sure the '08 study didn't mention a specific epithet (or I would definitely have mentioned it in the article), and it certainly didn't mention "Thecodontosaurus" alophos or alphos. Firsfron of Ronchester 05:22, 1 December 2009 (UTC)
An idea I wanted to run by you
- I'm glad you like the idea. I doubt Naish and the gang would get too involved, but where the two projects overlap, they may be willing to help. I'm gonna do some more brain storming, maybe a rough draft or two and then send the Dinolist a message. Abyssal (talk) 00:28, 3 December 2009 (UTC)
DYK for Stegomosuchus
On DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.
Materialscientist (talk) 11:44, 3 December 2009 (UTC)
Category:Cretaceous dinosaursHello J. Spencer, I have an advise about Category of Dinosaurs. At present, there are 56 articles in Category:Triassic dinosaurs, 245 articles in Category:Jurassic dinosaurs, and 617 articles in Category:Cretaceous dinosaurs.
However, Cretaceous is around 80 million years long, almost equaled to Late Triassic adding Jurassic. Besides, the Lower Cretaceous Dinosaurs group and Upper Cretaceous Dinosaurs group have obvious differences. My advise is that 「Category:Cretaceous dinosaurs」 can be divided into 「Category:Lower Cretaceous dinosaurs」 and 「Category:Upper Cretaceous dinosaurs」.
Also, I have a question about Dinosaurs in Pakistan. There seveal Dinosaurs found in Pakistan, such as:
Balochisaurus. My question is that whether Pakistan was a part of Indian-Madagascar in Cretaceous, or just a part of Asia continent. If Pakistan was a part of Indian-Madagascar, maybe the above articles should be moved into Category:Dinosaurs of India and Madagascar
hoseumou(talk) 13:59, 12 December 2009 (UTC)
Hadrosaur bipedality
- Fair enough, although I still think it shouldn't be included in the Jurassic Park article for two reasons: the work is unpublished; and perhaps more importantly, it's a bit unfair to call the JP people on it when it was perfectly legitimate to have bipedal running hadrosaurs in the 1990s. I think the page should stick to things that were known to be inaccurate or questionable at the time of production, like sizes and creative embellishments (intelligence, pretty much anything to do with Dilophosaurus, etc.). J. Spencer (talk) 04:39, 7 January 2010 (UTC)
Service awards proposal
Hello, J. Spencer/Archive 3! I noticed you display a service award, and would like to invite you to join the discussion over a proposed revamping of the awards.
If you have any opinions on the proposal, please participate in the discussion. Thanks! — the Man in Question (in question) 04:14, 8 January 2010 (UTC)
Kinkonychelys.
- Thank you very much! Oh no! It's not here!!! (talk) 08:00, 12 January 2010 (UTC)
- Hi again! Following your suggestions, I've gotten the page's main content up to 1227 characters, but of course, it still falls short of the DYK requirement by nearly 300 characters. The only information I can see in the paper about the genus that can still be included is the physical descriptions of the different specimens, and personal experience tells me I'm not too handy when it comes to understanding all of the scientific words used in these descriptions. I really want this article to become a DYK article, though, and I've already seen a few facts in what's been included that might "impress the judges" substantially for inclusion in a DYK update. If it's no trouble, and if any of that information is notable for inclusion in the article, could you please help with adding it in? That would be very much appreciated! Oh no! It's not here!!! (talk) 09:58, 12 January 2010 (UTC)
- Thanks again! Oh no! It's not here!!! (talk) 23:05, 12 January 2010 (UTC)
- Thanks a million, J. Spencer!!! Oh no! It's not here!!! (talk) 00:27, 13 January 2010 (UTC)
Talk:Dinosaur archiving
Deinonychus
- Thank you! I'm not actually very familiar with IPA, but people who are set up the templates on the dinosaur articles, and since this one's been stable for a long time, I figured it was probably a gag or a test edit. J. Spencer (talk) 00:50, 21 January 2010 (UTC)
- I cannot read IPA either - I merely "sounded it out", as you might phrase it. ;) -RadicalOne•Contact Me•Chase My Tail 02:44, 21 January 2010 (UTC)
WikiProject Dinosaurs in the Signpost
Redirects and categories
- Well, it doesn't really bother me either way; it just looked funny having it on a redirect. Species of Psittacosaurus
- I added comments o how to improve the article. GamerPro64 (talk) 01:59, 5 February 2010 (UTC)]
- I sorry to bother you but did you have me give suggestions to improve the article so you can improve the it or for someone else who would want to? GamerPro64 (talk) 23:18, 6 February 2010 (UTC).
- Thank you, J. Spencer!!! Oh no! It's not here!!! (talk) 23:39, 7 February 2010 (UTC)
Reply
Rhabdognathus.
- Okay then. Thank you for the links! Oh no! It's not here!!! (talk) 07:25, 2 March 2010 (UTC)
Linheraptor.
- Thanks! Oh no! It's not here!!! (talk) 02:31, 21 March 2010 (UTC)
Guanlong imageHello,
I've uploaded some images yesterday and put them with some articles.
You said that my images weren't the kind that you're looking for.
Is this one a bit better?
Guanlong wucaii Kind regards from 82.169.6.135 (talk) 13:45, 1 April 2010 (UTC) or better known as Joerim on the Dutch Wikipedia.
Welcome back
Re: Penghusuchus
Brachi and Giraffatitan
- I am torn between keeping a tidy list at the bottom and placing them at first use. I guess the latter is simply more common, and also easier to work with once the text doesn't change much anymore. However, writing the Plateosaurus article showed me that for a total re-write a list at the end would have been better - I spent lots of time searching through the editor. So I guess I'll keep the alphabetical list, and once the text is ready for the main page I'll place the citation at the first use. HMallison (talk) 06:08, 12 May 2010 (UTC)
You're quite right to prod me - however, I must point to the sauropoda re-write, which is devloping into a physiology of dinosaurs update.... I had some rough weeks, work and kids' health wise, but hope to contribute the missing data within the next few days. Then the text will need a thorough massage - was that you vounteering??? ;) HMallison (talk) 06:45, 15 June 2010 (UTC)
- Give me a day or two more, and I'll have a rough structure ready. Then we should talk about it - may or may not be best to use your structure. HMallison (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 15:57, 16 June 2010 (UTC).
If you're into sauropods....here's a must read for you :) Long, boring, but a "deal-breaker", 'cause it has all you ever need to know and cite (I hope).
http://www3.interscience.wiley.com/cgi-bin/fulltext/123397084/HTMLSTART
PDF here:
http://www3.interscience.wiley.com/cgi-bin/fulltext/123397084/PDFSTART
HMallison (talk) 23:35, 16 May 2010 (UTC)
- well, it took me three years to understand it all - but that did involve the research, too ;) Aachenosaurus
- Dunno. I've gone ahead and semi-protected for a month. We'll see if it deters this fellow or fellows. Only the pages listed at Wikipedia:Pending changes/Testing are to be flagged for pending changes. Firsfron of Ronchester 04:10, 9 July 2010 (UTC)
Family treeHi, I'm from the Dutch Wikipedia. Because I want an article to be finished tommorow (I'm going on holliday) I needed help from someone quikly, so I come to you. Maybe you still know me from the illustration of the Guanlong. Here's the problem:
<font color="white">unnamed
<font color="white">unnamed
<font color="white">unnamed
Champsosauridae
<font color="white">unnamed
familie Simoedosauridae
<font color="white">unnamed
?
Champsosauridae
I've got two family trees. The upper one is good, but in front of it there has to be "familie Simoedosauridae", like with the second one. Can you help me, please? Kind regards from 82.169.6.135 (talk) 19:48, 14 July 2010 (UTC) or Joerim, as I'm known at the Dutch Wikipedia.
- Thank you very much! Only one thing, what mistake did I make when making one of these family trees? Kind regards from 82.169.6.135 (talk) 07:35, 15 July 2010 (UTC) or Joerim
Talkback
Concavenator imageHi, I uploaded an image to Concavenator but it was removed due to it not being anatomically rigorous. I did a new one, which is here http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Conc2.png I used this image http://images.nationalgeographic.com/wpf/media-live/photos/000/257/cache/humpback-dinosaur-life-reconstruction_25710_600x450.jpg as a model, but I don't know if mine is yet fit to be used in the article. Any help on how are images judged would be very appreciated (I also posted all this on the article's talk page but I don't know if it will get much attention there).
thank you very much
Nestor db (talk) 18:44, 10 September 2010 (UTC)
Parks ref
-
- I tweaked the Q-Z section again so that it should look better on bigger monitors and/or higher resolutions. I haven't had a chance to look at it on my home monitor (at school now), so I thought I'd try to get some extra eyes on this until I can. Does it look any different/better/worse? Abyssal (talk) 16:08, 21 January 2009 (UTC)
- Thanks! That's what it should look like; it's what I see too. However, on the really large monitor's at my uni it actually looks wider, whereas the previous version left a big ugly gap. It looks a smidgen worse today on my monitor (and yours apparently) but it looks a heapload better that way on the monitors at school, and since people at schools form a large block of our viewers I think the tradeoff is justifiable. :) Abyssal (talk) 04:24, 22 January 2009 (UTC)
To J. Spencer
Edmontosaurus
DYK for Akanthosuchus
On February 14, 2009, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Akanthosuchus, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.
--Dravecky (talk) 04:22, 14 February 2009 (UTC)
Birds and dinosaurs
- Yeah, every so often some well-intentioned type comes along and removes "non-avian" from a dinosaur article. It beats the incredible expanding theropods and the cartoon cameo edits. J. Spencer (talk) 23:35, 25 February 2009 (UTC)
Barnstar
The Original Barnstar
For all-around good work, I award J. Spencer this Barnstar. Keep it up!--ragesoss (talk) 00:22, 26 February 2009 (UTC)
No lapsus calami in poposauridae?
Thanks
Dibothrosuchus
- Done! talk) 19:49, 7 March 2009 (UTC)
DYK for Miragaia (dinosaur)
On Miragaia (dinosaur), which you recently nominated. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.
Royalbroil 02:11, 6 March 2009 (UTC)
Edmontosaurus
DYK for Phyllodontosuchus
On March 9, 2009, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Phyllodontosuchus, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.
Shubinator (talk) 00:23, 9 March 2009 (UTC)
DYK for Dibothrosuchus
On March 12, 2009, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Dibothrosuchus, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.
Congratulations! PeterSymonds (talk) 22:13, 12 March 2009 (UTC)
Edmontosaurus
The entire article needs its prose reviewed; I merely listed items from the lead for starters. Regarding the use of animal: it's good to state the obvious, it's an easy-to-grasp non-jargon-y word, and it saves you from having to say the animal's name or "it" a lot. 05:01, 17 March 2009 (UTC)
DYK
Argentinosaurus againHello, I search for help about Argentinosaurus again. It seems that there are three papers about Argentinosaurus in 90s, such as:
- Appenzeller, T. 1994. Argentine dinos vie for heavyweight titles. Science 266, 1805.
- Paul, G.S. 1994. Is Garden Park home to the world’s largest known land animal? Garden Park Paleontology Society 4, 5.
- Paul, G.S. 1997. Dinosaur models: the good, the bad, and using them to estimate the mass of dinosaurs. In Wolberg, D.L., Stump, E. and Rosenberg, G.D. (eds), DinoFest International Proceedings, pp
But i can't find these papers in internet. Can you search these papers, and find out the length and weight of Argentinosaurus in these papers?
I'll be very thankful if you can help me, thanks. hoseumou 08:40, 28 March 2009 (UTC)
- Thanks you for your answer. But i have a question, it seems that [Early reconstructions estimated...] directly comes from Dinosaur Mailing List. Is that techniquely enough to be a reference? Finally, I have to say I very admired your dinosaur article, such as Edmontosaurus. :) hoseumou 07:43, 31 March 2009 (UTC)
QuinceratopsHi, Firs;
You'd better nail the article, too. J. Spencer (talk) 18:02, 24 May 2009 (UTC)
- Thanks J. The article was still redlinked when I removed it from Ceratopsidae. I'm not sure what to do about the image on Commons, File:Quinceratops 03869.JPG. Probably someone should be notified. Firsfron of Ronchester 18:15, 24 May 2009 (UTC)
- Moab man can probably be salvaged, given time (and a little TNT). Firsfron of Ronchester 19:33, 24 May 2009 (UTC)]
Piveteausaurus
RajasaurusHi! Spencer,
The following are quoated from Rjanag's talk page.
May I request you to please revisit the above article to review the tag, since another expert on the subject has edited it?--Nvvchar (talk) 09:46, 16 May 2009 (UTC)
- Hey Nvvchar, sorry it's taken me so long to get back. Anyway, it would probably be better to ask J. Spencer about this, since he's the one who did the rewriting and he's more familiar with the content. I'm sure that if he went through it it's probably all fine now, but I'd feel more comfortable letting him remove the tag (since he knows what the state of the article is, whereas all I can do right now is assume—and I'd rather not go through one sentence at a time, as JSpencer probably already has). rʨanaɢ talk/contribs 21:18, 30 May 2009 (UTC)
Since, as a well known expert in the field, you have edited the version of Rajasaurus after Rjanag,s tag, which was earlier also edited by a group of users of the
Dinosaurs Portal with extensive experience in this field, would you kindly consider removing the tag on the article? I am in the process of getting some pictures of Rajasuarus model erected in Lucknow India posted on the article. Thanks--Nvvchar (talk) 02:58, 31 May 2009 (UTC)]
- Thank you very much. I hope I will have opportunities in the near future on the ]
- Can you nominate this article for GA status since it is already assessed as "B" class and many of
Dinosaurs portal members like yourself and others have put in a lot of effort to improve it?--Nvvchar (talk) 15:37, 1 August 2009 (UTC)]
Heterodontosauridae
- I highly doubt that somebody would consider it OR, but it's better to be safe than sorry. Thanks for contacting the other editor, and hopefully a source can be found for it. --Happy editing! Nehrams2020 (talk • contrib) 05:04, 2 June 2009 (UTC)
Piveteau's brain probably was bigger than a walnut
- I think it's great. I think he was a scientific illustrator also; although many scientists at the time did their own illustrations, he was known for his. I tried to confirm this information to include in the article but found nothing specific. The illustrations can be included in both the dinosaur and bio articles, if you can get decent copies. If you don't get decent copies, and I have time, I can resketch at least the most important one of them if they're out of copyright. --69.226.103.13 (talk) 22:56, 2 June 2009 (UTC)
User 173.35.129.119 issues....I just undid a half dozen bad edits of his...again. He just got the temporary ban lifted and is right back at it..
it's gotten to where someone needs to get a perma ban put on that IP address. It's vandalism at this point. I don't know if you have that ability or can get in contact with someone who does, but it's really time. Forescore68 (talk) 16:15, 13 June 2009 (UTC)
- Oh, and thanks for cleaning up my Chuandongocoelurus mess...I did it in a huffy. Glad I don't lose points in this forum for being hasty and dumb...Forescore68 (talk) 02:33, 18 June 2009 (UTC)
Italictitle templateHi, Firs;
I just found out something useful about the italictitle template: I already knew that if it is put at the top, it prevents the uppermost [edit] bracket from showing. However, if it's put below the taxobox, as Bob did at Pteranodon and I just did with Allosaurus, it doesn't interfere. I don't know if this has editing drawbacks, but it's very good to know we can get back the edit bracket for the lede section, especially for ginormous articles. J. Spencer (talk) 01:35, 17 June 2009 (UTC)
- Hey!
- I didn't realize it prevents the uppermost edit link from showing. We might want to bring this up at tree of life. Either this should be fixed through the template itself, or I could possibly AWB it; I think there is a pretty easy way to delete the template name while substituting the same template name immediately below the taxobox. If this is acceptable to you (and everyone else who works in these areas), I could work on this tomorrow. Thanks for catching this. Firsfron of Ronchester 06:17, 17 June 2009 (UTC).
- P.S. Also, I'd like to make sure I interpreted everything I've included in the article correctly. Thanks in advance! Mess around with the guy in shades all you like - don't mess around with the girl in gloves! (talk) 08:28, 26 June 2009 (UTC)
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template. Mess around with the guy in shades all you like - don't mess around with the girl in gloves! (talk) 00:41, 27 June 2009 (UTC)
- I reveiewed the DYK hook for this, and everything looks fine except that I had some minor wording changes to the hook. If you are okay with those changes, please indicate so in its DYK submission at Template talk:Did You Know#Gallardosaurus and I can approve the hook. Rlendog (talk) 02:17, 8 July 2009 (UTC)]
New hoaxHi, Firs;
Here's a new one to nail, if it's still here by the time you read this: Rorasaurus. J. Spencer (talk) 13:19, 1 July 2009 (UTC)
(I'd watch Roarasaurus too, as they may try to recreate it.) J. Spencer (talk) 13:27, 1 July 2009 (UTC)
- Thanks. I've just nuked it. Firsfron of Ronchester 13:53, 1 July 2009 (UTC)
- Yeah, I'm going to start re-inquiring about the possibility of fixing WP:DABS. As you say, if some random IP hadn't added the name to the List, you wouldn't have noticed it. That's not good. Firsfron of Ronchester 00:47, 2 July 2009 (UTC)
- It's true: DABS was just one way of catching potential hoaxes (or very short new articles that editors sometimes create), but it was nice to have that option. Firsfron of Ronchester 04:32, 2 July 2009 (UTC)
- I had no idea it would be that easy. Request, and within an hour, voila! Firsfron of Ronchester 03:21, 13 July 2009 (UTC)
Thanks...
ITN for Australovenator, Diamantinasaurus and Wintonotitan
On In the news candidates page.
--BorgQueen (talk) 20:14, 4 July 2009 (UTC)
2009 hadrosaur chewing study
- I think with any article (media or not) there is a possibility of inaccuracies; that's why we check it with other sources, which is what I did in this Leonardo case. But I respect your opinion. I guess we'll just see where the AFD goes. — Hunter Kahn (c) 17:23, 5 July 2009 (UTC)
DYK for Gallardosaurus
On DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.
Wizardman 08:51, 10 July 2009 (UTC)
HerrerasaurusHey J,
After tomorrow, I am going on a 10-day wikibreak out of state, and may not have a ton of internet access. With the assistance of a lot of folks (including you... thanks, BTW) Herrerasaurus made it to FA, but there are still grammar adjustments that an editor wants to make. Can you take a look? I'm worried I won't be able to devote (much/any) time to genuine concerns over clarity. Firsfron of Ronchester 01:39, 30 July 2009 (UTC)
Carniadactylus.
Loch Ness Monster
- I think s/he’s almost figured out what was needed. Now, if only s/he could figure out how to enter citations fully … — SpikeToronto (talk) 17:21, 14 September 2009 (UTC)
- Well, it looks like it's taken care of, which goes on the positive side in my book. Thank you for the help! J. Spencer (talk) 03:09, 15 September 2009 (UTC)
Those hadrosaurs sure liked to eat, huh?
The Original Barnstar
For substantial additions to the Hadrosaur diet article, I salute you! Abyssal (talk) 03:55, 4 October 2009 (UTC)
Fruitadens
ITN for Fruitadens
On 22 October 2009, In the news was updated with a news item that involved the article Fruitadens, which you substantially updated. If you know of another interesting news item involving a recently created or updated article, then please suggest it on the candidates page.
--BorgQueen (talk) 16:32, 22 October 2009 (UTC)
RajasaurusHi!Spencer,
Congratulations for the GA upgarde of the artcile. Also thanks.--Nvvchar (talk) 18:34, 22 October 2009 (UTC)
Eld's DeerHi! Spencer,
Thanks for the message regarding
Eld's Deer was posted by me on DYK quite some months back and accepted. Since you are an expert in Fauna, will you please advice me if I should post it for GA upgrade. Thanks.--Nvvchar (talk) 02:04, 23 October 2009 (UTC)]
Re: Rajasaurus ga-rev
New find of Dinosaurs nestling ground in IndiaHi! Spencer,
A few days back I had read the above news item in several news papers in India. I have prepared a short write up on the same for any suitable insertion in the Portal or News item. Please see here
User:Nvvchar/sandbox/Ashokan Edicts (Delhi). You may kndly edit it suitably and if it has not appeared on the News page of WP you may consider posting it as a joint news item. Thanks.--Nvvchar (talk) 05:16, 28 October 2009 (UTC)]
Ceratonykus
ScienceDirectHi J,
Do you have access to ScienceDirect? I don't want to pay $31.50 for a paper which discusses "Teleocrater", especially when I don't know how detailed the portion on "Teleocrater" is. The cladogram from their analysis is viewable here, but that doesn't give me much to work with. I figured you being you, you might subscribe to their (rather expensive) service. If not, I'll just leave "Teleo" as he is for now. Firsfron of Ronchester 04:09, 12 November 2009 (UTC)
- Thanks J. As it turns out, a reference librarian I work with has access to the paper, so I now have it. Thanks again for offering. Take care, Firsfron of Ronchester 00:25, 13 November 2009 (UTC)
"Name"?
I know the scientific name should type in Name. But i see lots of scientific name in wikipedia were type in "Name". Why?
Is that official rules that Nomen nudum, Nomen oblitum, Nomen dubium should type in "Name"? or it is just a wikipedia rules? User:Devilfish1962 01:43, 26 Nov. 2009 (UTC)
96.239.237.62Hi, Firs;
I noticed you reverted
Bayosaurus". Having fixed a string of their edits this morning, I am 99% certain that this is the latest version of an editor who was recently blocked at 96.242.198.33 (talk · contribs) for inserting false dates, locations, and other information to paleo articles, and false episodes and voice actors to television shows. Something to keep an eye on, I suppose. J. Spencer (talk) 16:21, 28 November 2009 (UTC)]
- Hi J. Thanks. I wasn't aware of that. Something else to watch out for is this. Firsfron of Ronchester 17:07, 28 November 2009 (UTC)
ThescelosaurusHey J,
It looks like the Hungarian version of Thescelosaurus has become a FA! You're making a difference, even in languages you don't speak. :) (At least, I assume you don't speak Hungarian...) Firsfron of Ronchester 05:52, 30 November 2009 (UTC)
- That's a really weird discovery. I have the 2008 archosauriform histology study at work (I left it on my desk and I'm at home now), and they still treated "Teleocrater" as if it wasn't described. Despite being undescribed, the 2008 study, too, did give a lot of detail (about half a page, as I recall), as well as some illustrations. How does something remain "undescribed" when there's that much detail? I'll take another look tomorrow, but I'm pretty sure the '08 study didn't mention a specific epithet (or I would definitely have mentioned it in the article), and it certainly didn't mention "Thecodontosaurus" alophos or alphos. Firsfron of Ronchester 05:22, 1 December 2009 (UTC)
An idea I wanted to run by you
- I'm glad you like the idea. I doubt Naish and the gang would get too involved, but where the two projects overlap, they may be willing to help. I'm gonna do some more brain storming, maybe a rough draft or two and then send the Dinolist a message. Abyssal (talk) 00:28, 3 December 2009 (UTC)
DYK for Stegomosuchus
On DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.
Materialscientist (talk) 11:44, 3 December 2009 (UTC)
Category:Cretaceous dinosaursHello J. Spencer, I have an advise about Category of Dinosaurs. At present, there are 56 articles in Category:Triassic dinosaurs, 245 articles in Category:Jurassic dinosaurs, and 617 articles in Category:Cretaceous dinosaurs.
However, Cretaceous is around 80 million years long, almost equaled to Late Triassic adding Jurassic. Besides, the Lower Cretaceous Dinosaurs group and Upper Cretaceous Dinosaurs group have obvious differences. My advise is that 「Category:Cretaceous dinosaurs」 can be divided into 「Category:Lower Cretaceous dinosaurs」 and 「Category:Upper Cretaceous dinosaurs」.
Also, I have a question about Dinosaurs in Pakistan. There seveal Dinosaurs found in Pakistan, such as:
Balochisaurus. My question is that whether Pakistan was a part of Indian-Madagascar in Cretaceous, or just a part of Asia continent. If Pakistan was a part of Indian-Madagascar, maybe the above articles should be moved into Category:Dinosaurs of India and Madagascar
hoseumou(talk) 13:59, 12 December 2009 (UTC)
Hadrosaur bipedality
- Fair enough, although I still think it shouldn't be included in the Jurassic Park article for two reasons: the work is unpublished; and perhaps more importantly, it's a bit unfair to call the JP people on it when it was perfectly legitimate to have bipedal running hadrosaurs in the 1990s. I think the page should stick to things that were known to be inaccurate or questionable at the time of production, like sizes and creative embellishments (intelligence, pretty much anything to do with Dilophosaurus, etc.). J. Spencer (talk) 04:39, 7 January 2010 (UTC)
Service awards proposal
Hello, J. Spencer/Archive 3! I noticed you display a service award, and would like to invite you to join the discussion over a proposed revamping of the awards.
If you have any opinions on the proposal, please participate in the discussion. Thanks! — the Man in Question (in question) 04:14, 8 January 2010 (UTC)
Kinkonychelys.
- Thank you very much! Oh no! It's not here!!! (talk) 08:00, 12 January 2010 (UTC)
- Hi again! Following your suggestions, I've gotten the page's main content up to 1227 characters, but of course, it still falls short of the DYK requirement by nearly 300 characters. The only information I can see in the paper about the genus that can still be included is the physical descriptions of the different specimens, and personal experience tells me I'm not too handy when it comes to understanding all of the scientific words used in these descriptions. I really want this article to become a DYK article, though, and I've already seen a few facts in what's been included that might "impress the judges" substantially for inclusion in a DYK update. If it's no trouble, and if any of that information is notable for inclusion in the article, could you please help with adding it in? That would be very much appreciated! Oh no! It's not here!!! (talk) 09:58, 12 January 2010 (UTC)
- Thanks again! Oh no! It's not here!!! (talk) 23:05, 12 January 2010 (UTC)
- Thanks a million, J. Spencer!!! Oh no! It's not here!!! (talk) 00:27, 13 January 2010 (UTC)
Talk:Dinosaur archiving
Deinonychus
- Thank you! I'm not actually very familiar with IPA, but people who are set up the templates on the dinosaur articles, and since this one's been stable for a long time, I figured it was probably a gag or a test edit. J. Spencer (talk) 00:50, 21 January 2010 (UTC)
- I cannot read IPA either - I merely "sounded it out", as you might phrase it. ;) -RadicalOne•Contact Me•Chase My Tail 02:44, 21 January 2010 (UTC)
WikiProject Dinosaurs in the Signpost
Redirects and categories
- Well, it doesn't really bother me either way; it just looked funny having it on a redirect. Species of Psittacosaurus
- I added comments o how to improve the article. GamerPro64 (talk) 01:59, 5 February 2010 (UTC)]
- I sorry to bother you but did you have me give suggestions to improve the article so you can improve the it or for someone else who would want to? GamerPro64 (talk) 23:18, 6 February 2010 (UTC).
- Thank you, J. Spencer!!! Oh no! It's not here!!! (talk) 23:39, 7 February 2010 (UTC)
Reply
Rhabdognathus.
- Okay then. Thank you for the links! Oh no! It's not here!!! (talk) 07:25, 2 March 2010 (UTC)
Linheraptor.
- Thanks! Oh no! It's not here!!! (talk) 02:31, 21 March 2010 (UTC)
Guanlong imageHello,
I've uploaded some images yesterday and put them with some articles.
You said that my images weren't the kind that you're looking for.
Is this one a bit better?
Guanlong wucaii Kind regards from 82.169.6.135 (talk) 13:45, 1 April 2010 (UTC) or better known as Joerim on the Dutch Wikipedia.
Welcome back
Re: Penghusuchus
Brachi and Giraffatitan
- I am torn between keeping a tidy list at the bottom and placing them at first use. I guess the latter is simply more common, and also easier to work with once the text doesn't change much anymore. However, writing the Plateosaurus article showed me that for a total re-write a list at the end would have been better - I spent lots of time searching through the editor. So I guess I'll keep the alphabetical list, and once the text is ready for the main page I'll place the citation at the first use. HMallison (talk) 06:08, 12 May 2010 (UTC)
You're quite right to prod me - however, I must point to the sauropoda re-write, which is devloping into a physiology of dinosaurs update.... I had some rough weeks, work and kids' health wise, but hope to contribute the missing data within the next few days. Then the text will need a thorough massage - was that you vounteering??? ;) HMallison (talk) 06:45, 15 June 2010 (UTC)
- Give me a day or two more, and I'll have a rough structure ready. Then we should talk about it - may or may not be best to use your structure. HMallison (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 15:57, 16 June 2010 (UTC).
If you're into sauropods....here's a must read for you :) Long, boring, but a "deal-breaker", 'cause it has all you ever need to know and cite (I hope).
http://www3.interscience.wiley.com/cgi-bin/fulltext/123397084/HTMLSTART
PDF here:
http://www3.interscience.wiley.com/cgi-bin/fulltext/123397084/PDFSTART
HMallison (talk) 23:35, 16 May 2010 (UTC)
- well, it took me three years to understand it all - but that did involve the research, too ;) Aachenosaurus
- Dunno. I've gone ahead and semi-protected for a month. We'll see if it deters this fellow or fellows. Only the pages listed at Wikipedia:Pending changes/Testing are to be flagged for pending changes. Firsfron of Ronchester 04:10, 9 July 2010 (UTC)
Family treeHi, I'm from the Dutch Wikipedia. Because I want an article to be finished tommorow (I'm going on holliday) I needed help from someone quikly, so I come to you. Maybe you still know me from the illustration of the Guanlong. Here's the problem:
<font color="white">unnamed
<font color="white">unnamed
<font color="white">unnamed
Champsosauridae
<font color="white">unnamed
familie Simoedosauridae
<font color="white">unnamed
?
Champsosauridae
I've got two family trees. The upper one is good, but in front of it there has to be "familie Simoedosauridae", like with the second one. Can you help me, please? Kind regards from 82.169.6.135 (talk) 19:48, 14 July 2010 (UTC) or Joerim, as I'm known at the Dutch Wikipedia.
- Thank you very much! Only one thing, what mistake did I make when making one of these family trees? Kind regards from 82.169.6.135 (talk) 07:35, 15 July 2010 (UTC) or Joerim
Talkback
Concavenator imageHi, I uploaded an image to Concavenator but it was removed due to it not being anatomically rigorous. I did a new one, which is here http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Conc2.png I used this image http://images.nationalgeographic.com/wpf/media-live/photos/000/257/cache/humpback-dinosaur-life-reconstruction_25710_600x450.jpg as a model, but I don't know if mine is yet fit to be used in the article. Any help on how are images judged would be very appreciated (I also posted all this on the article's talk page but I don't know if it will get much attention there).
thank you very much
Nestor db (talk) 18:44, 10 September 2010 (UTC)
Parks ref
-
DYK for Akanthosuchus
Birds and dinosaurs
- Yeah, every so often some well-intentioned type comes along and removes "non-avian" from a dinosaur article. It beats the incredible expanding theropods and the cartoon cameo edits. J. Spencer (talk) 23:35, 25 February 2009 (UTC)
Barnstar
The Original Barnstar
For all-around good work, I award J. Spencer this Barnstar. Keep it up!--ragesoss (talk) 00:22, 26 February 2009 (UTC)
No lapsus calami in poposauridae?
Thanks
Dibothrosuchus
- Done! talk) 19:49, 7 March 2009 (UTC)
DYK for Miragaia (dinosaur)
On Miragaia (dinosaur), which you recently nominated. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.
Royalbroil 02:11, 6 March 2009 (UTC)
Edmontosaurus
DYK for Phyllodontosuchus
On March 9, 2009, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Phyllodontosuchus, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.
Shubinator (talk) 00:23, 9 March 2009 (UTC)
DYK for Dibothrosuchus
On March 12, 2009, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Dibothrosuchus, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.
Congratulations! PeterSymonds (talk) 22:13, 12 March 2009 (UTC)
Edmontosaurus
The entire article needs its prose reviewed; I merely listed items from the lead for starters. Regarding the use of animal: it's good to state the obvious, it's an easy-to-grasp non-jargon-y word, and it saves you from having to say the animal's name or "it" a lot. 05:01, 17 March 2009 (UTC)
DYK
Argentinosaurus againHello, I search for help about Argentinosaurus again. It seems that there are three papers about Argentinosaurus in 90s, such as:
- Appenzeller, T. 1994. Argentine dinos vie for heavyweight titles. Science 266, 1805.
- Paul, G.S. 1994. Is Garden Park home to the world’s largest known land animal? Garden Park Paleontology Society 4, 5.
- Paul, G.S. 1997. Dinosaur models: the good, the bad, and using them to estimate the mass of dinosaurs. In Wolberg, D.L., Stump, E. and Rosenberg, G.D. (eds), DinoFest International Proceedings, pp
But i can't find these papers in internet. Can you search these papers, and find out the length and weight of Argentinosaurus in these papers?
I'll be very thankful if you can help me, thanks. hoseumou 08:40, 28 March 2009 (UTC)
- Thanks you for your answer. But i have a question, it seems that [Early reconstructions estimated...] directly comes from Dinosaur Mailing List. Is that techniquely enough to be a reference? Finally, I have to say I very admired your dinosaur article, such as Edmontosaurus. :) hoseumou 07:43, 31 March 2009 (UTC)
QuinceratopsHi, Firs;
You'd better nail the article, too. J. Spencer (talk) 18:02, 24 May 2009 (UTC)
- Thanks J. The article was still redlinked when I removed it from Ceratopsidae. I'm not sure what to do about the image on Commons, File:Quinceratops 03869.JPG. Probably someone should be notified. Firsfron of Ronchester 18:15, 24 May 2009 (UTC)
- Moab man can probably be salvaged, given time (and a little TNT). Firsfron of Ronchester 19:33, 24 May 2009 (UTC)]
Piveteausaurus
RajasaurusHi! Spencer,
The following are quoated from Rjanag's talk page.
May I request you to please revisit the above article to review the tag, since another expert on the subject has edited it?--Nvvchar (talk) 09:46, 16 May 2009 (UTC)
- Hey Nvvchar, sorry it's taken me so long to get back. Anyway, it would probably be better to ask J. Spencer about this, since he's the one who did the rewriting and he's more familiar with the content. I'm sure that if he went through it it's probably all fine now, but I'd feel more comfortable letting him remove the tag (since he knows what the state of the article is, whereas all I can do right now is assume—and I'd rather not go through one sentence at a time, as JSpencer probably already has). rʨanaɢ talk/contribs 21:18, 30 May 2009 (UTC)
Since, as a well known expert in the field, you have edited the version of Rajasaurus after Rjanag,s tag, which was earlier also edited by a group of users of the
Dinosaurs Portal with extensive experience in this field, would you kindly consider removing the tag on the article? I am in the process of getting some pictures of Rajasuarus model erected in Lucknow India posted on the article. Thanks--Nvvchar (talk) 02:58, 31 May 2009 (UTC)]
- Thank you very much. I hope I will have opportunities in the near future on the ]
- Can you nominate this article for GA status since it is already assessed as "B" class and many of
Dinosaurs portal members like yourself and others have put in a lot of effort to improve it?--Nvvchar (talk) 15:37, 1 August 2009 (UTC)]
Heterodontosauridae
- I highly doubt that somebody would consider it OR, but it's better to be safe than sorry. Thanks for contacting the other editor, and hopefully a source can be found for it. --Happy editing! Nehrams2020 (talk • contrib) 05:04, 2 June 2009 (UTC)
Piveteau's brain probably was bigger than a walnut
- I think it's great. I think he was a scientific illustrator also; although many scientists at the time did their own illustrations, he was known for his. I tried to confirm this information to include in the article but found nothing specific. The illustrations can be included in both the dinosaur and bio articles, if you can get decent copies. If you don't get decent copies, and I have time, I can resketch at least the most important one of them if they're out of copyright. --69.226.103.13 (talk) 22:56, 2 June 2009 (UTC)
User 173.35.129.119 issues....I just undid a half dozen bad edits of his...again. He just got the temporary ban lifted and is right back at it..
it's gotten to where someone needs to get a perma ban put on that IP address. It's vandalism at this point. I don't know if you have that ability or can get in contact with someone who does, but it's really time. Forescore68 (talk) 16:15, 13 June 2009 (UTC)
- Oh, and thanks for cleaning up my Chuandongocoelurus mess...I did it in a huffy. Glad I don't lose points in this forum for being hasty and dumb...Forescore68 (talk) 02:33, 18 June 2009 (UTC)
Italictitle templateHi, Firs;
I just found out something useful about the italictitle template: I already knew that if it is put at the top, it prevents the uppermost [edit] bracket from showing. However, if it's put below the taxobox, as Bob did at Pteranodon and I just did with Allosaurus, it doesn't interfere. I don't know if this has editing drawbacks, but it's very good to know we can get back the edit bracket for the lede section, especially for ginormous articles. J. Spencer (talk) 01:35, 17 June 2009 (UTC)
- Hey!
- I didn't realize it prevents the uppermost edit link from showing. We might want to bring this up at tree of life. Either this should be fixed through the template itself, or I could possibly AWB it; I think there is a pretty easy way to delete the template name while substituting the same template name immediately below the taxobox. If this is acceptable to you (and everyone else who works in these areas), I could work on this tomorrow. Thanks for catching this. Firsfron of Ronchester 06:17, 17 June 2009 (UTC).
- P.S. Also, I'd like to make sure I interpreted everything I've included in the article correctly. Thanks in advance! Mess around with the guy in shades all you like - don't mess around with the girl in gloves! (talk) 08:28, 26 June 2009 (UTC)
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template. Mess around with the guy in shades all you like - don't mess around with the girl in gloves! (talk) 00:41, 27 June 2009 (UTC)
- I reveiewed the DYK hook for this, and everything looks fine except that I had some minor wording changes to the hook. If you are okay with those changes, please indicate so in its DYK submission at Template talk:Did You Know#Gallardosaurus and I can approve the hook. Rlendog (talk) 02:17, 8 July 2009 (UTC)]
New hoaxHi, Firs;
Here's a new one to nail, if it's still here by the time you read this: Rorasaurus. J. Spencer (talk) 13:19, 1 July 2009 (UTC)
(I'd watch Roarasaurus too, as they may try to recreate it.) J. Spencer (talk) 13:27, 1 July 2009 (UTC)
- Thanks. I've just nuked it. Firsfron of Ronchester 13:53, 1 July 2009 (UTC)
- Yeah, I'm going to start re-inquiring about the possibility of fixing WP:DABS. As you say, if some random IP hadn't added the name to the List, you wouldn't have noticed it. That's not good. Firsfron of Ronchester 00:47, 2 July 2009 (UTC)
- It's true: DABS was just one way of catching potential hoaxes (or very short new articles that editors sometimes create), but it was nice to have that option. Firsfron of Ronchester 04:32, 2 July 2009 (UTC)
- I had no idea it would be that easy. Request, and within an hour, voila! Firsfron of Ronchester 03:21, 13 July 2009 (UTC)
Thanks...
ITN for Australovenator, Diamantinasaurus and Wintonotitan
On In the news candidates page.
--BorgQueen (talk) 20:14, 4 July 2009 (UTC)
2009 hadrosaur chewing study
- I think with any article (media or not) there is a possibility of inaccuracies; that's why we check it with other sources, which is what I did in this Leonardo case. But I respect your opinion. I guess we'll just see where the AFD goes. — Hunter Kahn (c) 17:23, 5 July 2009 (UTC)
DYK for Gallardosaurus
On DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.
Wizardman 08:51, 10 July 2009 (UTC)
HerrerasaurusHey J,
After tomorrow, I am going on a 10-day wikibreak out of state, and may not have a ton of internet access. With the assistance of a lot of folks (including you... thanks, BTW) Herrerasaurus made it to FA, but there are still grammar adjustments that an editor wants to make. Can you take a look? I'm worried I won't be able to devote (much/any) time to genuine concerns over clarity. Firsfron of Ronchester 01:39, 30 July 2009 (UTC)
Carniadactylus.
Loch Ness Monster
- I think s/he’s almost figured out what was needed. Now, if only s/he could figure out how to enter citations fully … — SpikeToronto (talk) 17:21, 14 September 2009 (UTC)
- Well, it looks like it's taken care of, which goes on the positive side in my book. Thank you for the help! J. Spencer (talk) 03:09, 15 September 2009 (UTC)
Those hadrosaurs sure liked to eat, huh?
The Original Barnstar
For substantial additions to the Hadrosaur diet article, I salute you! Abyssal (talk) 03:55, 4 October 2009 (UTC)
Fruitadens
ITN for Fruitadens
On 22 October 2009, In the news was updated with a news item that involved the article Fruitadens, which you substantially updated. If you know of another interesting news item involving a recently created or updated article, then please suggest it on the candidates page.
--BorgQueen (talk) 16:32, 22 October 2009 (UTC)
RajasaurusHi!Spencer,
Congratulations for the GA upgarde of the artcile. Also thanks.--Nvvchar (talk) 18:34, 22 October 2009 (UTC)
Eld's DeerHi! Spencer,
Thanks for the message regarding
Eld's Deer was posted by me on DYK quite some months back and accepted. Since you are an expert in Fauna, will you please advice me if I should post it for GA upgrade. Thanks.--Nvvchar (talk) 02:04, 23 October 2009 (UTC)]
Re: Rajasaurus ga-rev
New find of Dinosaurs nestling ground in IndiaHi! Spencer,
A few days back I had read the above news item in several news papers in India. I have prepared a short write up on the same for any suitable insertion in the Portal or News item. Please see here
User:Nvvchar/sandbox/Ashokan Edicts (Delhi). You may kndly edit it suitably and if it has not appeared on the News page of WP you may consider posting it as a joint news item. Thanks.--Nvvchar (talk) 05:16, 28 October 2009 (UTC)]
Ceratonykus
ScienceDirectHi J,
Do you have access to ScienceDirect? I don't want to pay $31.50 for a paper which discusses "Teleocrater", especially when I don't know how detailed the portion on "Teleocrater" is. The cladogram from their analysis is viewable here, but that doesn't give me much to work with. I figured you being you, you might subscribe to their (rather expensive) service. If not, I'll just leave "Teleo" as he is for now. Firsfron of Ronchester 04:09, 12 November 2009 (UTC)
- Thanks J. As it turns out, a reference librarian I work with has access to the paper, so I now have it. Thanks again for offering. Take care, Firsfron of Ronchester 00:25, 13 November 2009 (UTC)
"Name"?
I know the scientific name should type in Name. But i see lots of scientific name in wikipedia were type in "Name". Why?
Is that official rules that Nomen nudum, Nomen oblitum, Nomen dubium should type in "Name"? or it is just a wikipedia rules? User:Devilfish1962 01:43, 26 Nov. 2009 (UTC)
96.239.237.62Hi, Firs;
I noticed you reverted
Bayosaurus". Having fixed a string of their edits this morning, I am 99% certain that this is the latest version of an editor who was recently blocked at 96.242.198.33 (talk · contribs) for inserting false dates, locations, and other information to paleo articles, and false episodes and voice actors to television shows. Something to keep an eye on, I suppose. J. Spencer (talk) 16:21, 28 November 2009 (UTC)]
- Hi J. Thanks. I wasn't aware of that. Something else to watch out for is this. Firsfron of Ronchester 17:07, 28 November 2009 (UTC)
ThescelosaurusHey J,
It looks like the Hungarian version of Thescelosaurus has become a FA! You're making a difference, even in languages you don't speak. :) (At least, I assume you don't speak Hungarian...) Firsfron of Ronchester 05:52, 30 November 2009 (UTC)
- That's a really weird discovery. I have the 2008 archosauriform histology study at work (I left it on my desk and I'm at home now), and they still treated "Teleocrater" as if it wasn't described. Despite being undescribed, the 2008 study, too, did give a lot of detail (about half a page, as I recall), as well as some illustrations. How does something remain "undescribed" when there's that much detail? I'll take another look tomorrow, but I'm pretty sure the '08 study didn't mention a specific epithet (or I would definitely have mentioned it in the article), and it certainly didn't mention "Thecodontosaurus" alophos or alphos. Firsfron of Ronchester 05:22, 1 December 2009 (UTC)
An idea I wanted to run by you
- I'm glad you like the idea. I doubt Naish and the gang would get too involved, but where the two projects overlap, they may be willing to help. I'm gonna do some more brain storming, maybe a rough draft or two and then send the Dinolist a message. Abyssal (talk) 00:28, 3 December 2009 (UTC)
DYK for Stegomosuchus
On DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.
Materialscientist (talk) 11:44, 3 December 2009 (UTC)
Category:Cretaceous dinosaursHello J. Spencer, I have an advise about Category of Dinosaurs. At present, there are 56 articles in Category:Triassic dinosaurs, 245 articles in Category:Jurassic dinosaurs, and 617 articles in Category:Cretaceous dinosaurs.
However, Cretaceous is around 80 million years long, almost equaled to Late Triassic adding Jurassic. Besides, the Lower Cretaceous Dinosaurs group and Upper Cretaceous Dinosaurs group have obvious differences. My advise is that 「Category:Cretaceous dinosaurs」 can be divided into 「Category:Lower Cretaceous dinosaurs」 and 「Category:Upper Cretaceous dinosaurs」.
Also, I have a question about Dinosaurs in Pakistan. There seveal Dinosaurs found in Pakistan, such as:
Balochisaurus. My question is that whether Pakistan was a part of Indian-Madagascar in Cretaceous, or just a part of Asia continent. If Pakistan was a part of Indian-Madagascar, maybe the above articles should be moved into Category:Dinosaurs of India and Madagascar
hoseumou(talk) 13:59, 12 December 2009 (UTC)
Hadrosaur bipedality
- Fair enough, although I still think it shouldn't be included in the Jurassic Park article for two reasons: the work is unpublished; and perhaps more importantly, it's a bit unfair to call the JP people on it when it was perfectly legitimate to have bipedal running hadrosaurs in the 1990s. I think the page should stick to things that were known to be inaccurate or questionable at the time of production, like sizes and creative embellishments (intelligence, pretty much anything to do with Dilophosaurus, etc.). J. Spencer (talk) 04:39, 7 January 2010 (UTC)
Service awards proposal
Hello, J. Spencer/Archive 3! I noticed you display a service award, and would like to invite you to join the discussion over a proposed revamping of the awards.
If you have any opinions on the proposal, please participate in the discussion. Thanks! — the Man in Question (in question) 04:14, 8 January 2010 (UTC)
Kinkonychelys.
- Thank you very much! Oh no! It's not here!!! (talk) 08:00, 12 January 2010 (UTC)
- Hi again! Following your suggestions, I've gotten the page's main content up to 1227 characters, but of course, it still falls short of the DYK requirement by nearly 300 characters. The only information I can see in the paper about the genus that can still be included is the physical descriptions of the different specimens, and personal experience tells me I'm not too handy when it comes to understanding all of the scientific words used in these descriptions. I really want this article to become a DYK article, though, and I've already seen a few facts in what's been included that might "impress the judges" substantially for inclusion in a DYK update. If it's no trouble, and if any of that information is notable for inclusion in the article, could you please help with adding it in? That would be very much appreciated! Oh no! It's not here!!! (talk) 09:58, 12 January 2010 (UTC)
- Thanks again! Oh no! It's not here!!! (talk) 23:05, 12 January 2010 (UTC)
- Thanks a million, J. Spencer!!! Oh no! It's not here!!! (talk) 00:27, 13 January 2010 (UTC)
Talk:Dinosaur archiving
Deinonychus
- Thank you! I'm not actually very familiar with IPA, but people who are set up the templates on the dinosaur articles, and since this one's been stable for a long time, I figured it was probably a gag or a test edit. J. Spencer (talk) 00:50, 21 January 2010 (UTC)
- I cannot read IPA either - I merely "sounded it out", as you might phrase it. ;) -RadicalOne•Contact Me•Chase My Tail 02:44, 21 January 2010 (UTC)
WikiProject Dinosaurs in the Signpost
Redirects and categories
- Well, it doesn't really bother me either way; it just looked funny having it on a redirect. Species of Psittacosaurus
- I added comments o how to improve the article. GamerPro64 (talk) 01:59, 5 February 2010 (UTC)]
- I sorry to bother you but did you have me give suggestions to improve the article so you can improve the it or for someone else who would want to? GamerPro64 (talk) 23:18, 6 February 2010 (UTC).
- Thank you, J. Spencer!!! Oh no! It's not here!!! (talk) 23:39, 7 February 2010 (UTC)
Reply
Rhabdognathus.
- Okay then. Thank you for the links! Oh no! It's not here!!! (talk) 07:25, 2 March 2010 (UTC)
Linheraptor.
- Thanks! Oh no! It's not here!!! (talk) 02:31, 21 March 2010 (UTC)
Guanlong imageHello,
I've uploaded some images yesterday and put them with some articles.
You said that my images weren't the kind that you're looking for.
Is this one a bit better?
Guanlong wucaii Kind regards from 82.169.6.135 (talk) 13:45, 1 April 2010 (UTC) or better known as Joerim on the Dutch Wikipedia.
Welcome back
Re: Penghusuchus
Brachi and Giraffatitan
- I am torn between keeping a tidy list at the bottom and placing them at first use. I guess the latter is simply more common, and also easier to work with once the text doesn't change much anymore. However, writing the Plateosaurus article showed me that for a total re-write a list at the end would have been better - I spent lots of time searching through the editor. So I guess I'll keep the alphabetical list, and once the text is ready for the main page I'll place the citation at the first use. HMallison (talk) 06:08, 12 May 2010 (UTC)
You're quite right to prod me - however, I must point to the sauropoda re-write, which is devloping into a physiology of dinosaurs update.... I had some rough weeks, work and kids' health wise, but hope to contribute the missing data within the next few days. Then the text will need a thorough massage - was that you vounteering??? ;) HMallison (talk) 06:45, 15 June 2010 (UTC)
- Give me a day or two more, and I'll have a rough structure ready. Then we should talk about it - may or may not be best to use your structure. HMallison (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 15:57, 16 June 2010 (UTC).
If you're into sauropods....here's a must read for you :) Long, boring, but a "deal-breaker", 'cause it has all you ever need to know and cite (I hope).
http://www3.interscience.wiley.com/cgi-bin/fulltext/123397084/HTMLSTART
PDF here:
http://www3.interscience.wiley.com/cgi-bin/fulltext/123397084/PDFSTART
HMallison (talk) 23:35, 16 May 2010 (UTC)
- well, it took me three years to understand it all - but that did involve the research, too ;) Aachenosaurus
- Dunno. I've gone ahead and semi-protected for a month. We'll see if it deters this fellow or fellows. Only the pages listed at Wikipedia:Pending changes/Testing are to be flagged for pending changes. Firsfron of Ronchester 04:10, 9 July 2010 (UTC)
Family treeHi, I'm from the Dutch Wikipedia. Because I want an article to be finished tommorow (I'm going on holliday) I needed help from someone quikly, so I come to you. Maybe you still know me from the illustration of the Guanlong. Here's the problem:
<font color="white">unnamed
<font color="white">unnamed
<font color="white">unnamed
Champsosauridae
<font color="white">unnamed
familie Simoedosauridae
<font color="white">unnamed
?
Champsosauridae
I've got two family trees. The upper one is good, but in front of it there has to be "familie Simoedosauridae", like with the second one. Can you help me, please? Kind regards from 82.169.6.135 (talk) 19:48, 14 July 2010 (UTC) or Joerim, as I'm known at the Dutch Wikipedia.
- Thank you very much! Only one thing, what mistake did I make when making one of these family trees? Kind regards from 82.169.6.135 (talk) 07:35, 15 July 2010 (UTC) or Joerim
Talkback
Concavenator imageHi, I uploaded an image to Concavenator but it was removed due to it not being anatomically rigorous. I did a new one, which is here http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Conc2.png I used this image http://images.nationalgeographic.com/wpf/media-live/photos/000/257/cache/humpback-dinosaur-life-reconstruction_25710_600x450.jpg as a model, but I don't know if mine is yet fit to be used in the article. Any help on how are images judged would be very appreciated (I also posted all this on the article's talk page but I don't know if it will get much attention there).
thank you very much
Nestor db (talk) 18:44, 10 September 2010 (UTC)
Parks ref
-
Barnstar
No lapsus calami in poposauridae?
Thanks
Dibothrosuchus
- Done! talk) 19:49, 7 March 2009 (UTC)
DYK for Miragaia (dinosaur)
On Miragaia (dinosaur), which you recently nominated. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.
Royalbroil 02:11, 6 March 2009 (UTC)
Edmontosaurus
DYK for Phyllodontosuchus
On March 9, 2009, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Phyllodontosuchus, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.
Shubinator (talk) 00:23, 9 March 2009 (UTC)
DYK for Dibothrosuchus
On March 12, 2009, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Dibothrosuchus, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.
Congratulations! PeterSymonds (talk) 22:13, 12 March 2009 (UTC)
Edmontosaurus
The entire article needs its prose reviewed; I merely listed items from the lead for starters. Regarding the use of animal: it's good to state the obvious, it's an easy-to-grasp non-jargon-y word, and it saves you from having to say the animal's name or "it" a lot. 05:01, 17 March 2009 (UTC)
DYK
Argentinosaurus againHello, I search for help about Argentinosaurus again. It seems that there are three papers about Argentinosaurus in 90s, such as:
- Appenzeller, T. 1994. Argentine dinos vie for heavyweight titles. Science 266, 1805.
- Paul, G.S. 1994. Is Garden Park home to the world’s largest known land animal? Garden Park Paleontology Society 4, 5.
- Paul, G.S. 1997. Dinosaur models: the good, the bad, and using them to estimate the mass of dinosaurs. In Wolberg, D.L., Stump, E. and Rosenberg, G.D. (eds), DinoFest International Proceedings, pp
But i can't find these papers in internet. Can you search these papers, and find out the length and weight of Argentinosaurus in these papers?
I'll be very thankful if you can help me, thanks. hoseumou 08:40, 28 March 2009 (UTC)
- Thanks you for your answer. But i have a question, it seems that [Early reconstructions estimated...] directly comes from Dinosaur Mailing List. Is that techniquely enough to be a reference? Finally, I have to say I very admired your dinosaur article, such as Edmontosaurus. :) hoseumou 07:43, 31 March 2009 (UTC)
QuinceratopsHi, Firs;
You'd better nail the article, too. J. Spencer (talk) 18:02, 24 May 2009 (UTC)
- Thanks J. The article was still redlinked when I removed it from Ceratopsidae. I'm not sure what to do about the image on Commons, File:Quinceratops 03869.JPG. Probably someone should be notified. Firsfron of Ronchester 18:15, 24 May 2009 (UTC)
- Moab man can probably be salvaged, given time (and a little TNT). Firsfron of Ronchester 19:33, 24 May 2009 (UTC)]
Piveteausaurus
RajasaurusHi! Spencer,
The following are quoated from Rjanag's talk page.
May I request you to please revisit the above article to review the tag, since another expert on the subject has edited it?--Nvvchar (talk) 09:46, 16 May 2009 (UTC)
- Hey Nvvchar, sorry it's taken me so long to get back. Anyway, it would probably be better to ask J. Spencer about this, since he's the one who did the rewriting and he's more familiar with the content. I'm sure that if he went through it it's probably all fine now, but I'd feel more comfortable letting him remove the tag (since he knows what the state of the article is, whereas all I can do right now is assume—and I'd rather not go through one sentence at a time, as JSpencer probably already has). rʨanaɢ talk/contribs 21:18, 30 May 2009 (UTC)
Since, as a well known expert in the field, you have edited the version of Rajasaurus after Rjanag,s tag, which was earlier also edited by a group of users of the
Dinosaurs Portal with extensive experience in this field, would you kindly consider removing the tag on the article? I am in the process of getting some pictures of Rajasuarus model erected in Lucknow India posted on the article. Thanks--Nvvchar (talk) 02:58, 31 May 2009 (UTC)]
- Thank you very much. I hope I will have opportunities in the near future on the ]
- Can you nominate this article for GA status since it is already assessed as "B" class and many of
Dinosaurs portal members like yourself and others have put in a lot of effort to improve it?--Nvvchar (talk) 15:37, 1 August 2009 (UTC)]
Heterodontosauridae
- I highly doubt that somebody would consider it OR, but it's better to be safe than sorry. Thanks for contacting the other editor, and hopefully a source can be found for it. --Happy editing! Nehrams2020 (talk • contrib) 05:04, 2 June 2009 (UTC)
Piveteau's brain probably was bigger than a walnut
- I think it's great. I think he was a scientific illustrator also; although many scientists at the time did their own illustrations, he was known for his. I tried to confirm this information to include in the article but found nothing specific. The illustrations can be included in both the dinosaur and bio articles, if you can get decent copies. If you don't get decent copies, and I have time, I can resketch at least the most important one of them if they're out of copyright. --69.226.103.13 (talk) 22:56, 2 June 2009 (UTC)
User 173.35.129.119 issues....I just undid a half dozen bad edits of his...again. He just got the temporary ban lifted and is right back at it..
it's gotten to where someone needs to get a perma ban put on that IP address. It's vandalism at this point. I don't know if you have that ability or can get in contact with someone who does, but it's really time. Forescore68 (talk) 16:15, 13 June 2009 (UTC)
- Oh, and thanks for cleaning up my Chuandongocoelurus mess...I did it in a huffy. Glad I don't lose points in this forum for being hasty and dumb...Forescore68 (talk) 02:33, 18 June 2009 (UTC)
Italictitle templateHi, Firs;
I just found out something useful about the italictitle template: I already knew that if it is put at the top, it prevents the uppermost [edit] bracket from showing. However, if it's put below the taxobox, as Bob did at Pteranodon and I just did with Allosaurus, it doesn't interfere. I don't know if this has editing drawbacks, but it's very good to know we can get back the edit bracket for the lede section, especially for ginormous articles. J. Spencer (talk) 01:35, 17 June 2009 (UTC)
- Hey!
- I didn't realize it prevents the uppermost edit link from showing. We might want to bring this up at tree of life. Either this should be fixed through the template itself, or I could possibly AWB it; I think there is a pretty easy way to delete the template name while substituting the same template name immediately below the taxobox. If this is acceptable to you (and everyone else who works in these areas), I could work on this tomorrow. Thanks for catching this. Firsfron of Ronchester 06:17, 17 June 2009 (UTC).
- P.S. Also, I'd like to make sure I interpreted everything I've included in the article correctly. Thanks in advance! Mess around with the guy in shades all you like - don't mess around with the girl in gloves! (talk) 08:28, 26 June 2009 (UTC)
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template. Mess around with the guy in shades all you like - don't mess around with the girl in gloves! (talk) 00:41, 27 June 2009 (UTC)
- I reveiewed the DYK hook for this, and everything looks fine except that I had some minor wording changes to the hook. If you are okay with those changes, please indicate so in its DYK submission at Template talk:Did You Know#Gallardosaurus and I can approve the hook. Rlendog (talk) 02:17, 8 July 2009 (UTC)]
New hoaxHi, Firs;
Here's a new one to nail, if it's still here by the time you read this: Rorasaurus. J. Spencer (talk) 13:19, 1 July 2009 (UTC)
(I'd watch Roarasaurus too, as they may try to recreate it.) J. Spencer (talk) 13:27, 1 July 2009 (UTC)
- Thanks. I've just nuked it. Firsfron of Ronchester 13:53, 1 July 2009 (UTC)
- Yeah, I'm going to start re-inquiring about the possibility of fixing WP:DABS. As you say, if some random IP hadn't added the name to the List, you wouldn't have noticed it. That's not good. Firsfron of Ronchester 00:47, 2 July 2009 (UTC)
- It's true: DABS was just one way of catching potential hoaxes (or very short new articles that editors sometimes create), but it was nice to have that option. Firsfron of Ronchester 04:32, 2 July 2009 (UTC)
- I had no idea it would be that easy. Request, and within an hour, voila! Firsfron of Ronchester 03:21, 13 July 2009 (UTC)
Thanks...
ITN for Australovenator, Diamantinasaurus and Wintonotitan
On In the news candidates page.
--BorgQueen (talk) 20:14, 4 July 2009 (UTC)
2009 hadrosaur chewing study
- I think with any article (media or not) there is a possibility of inaccuracies; that's why we check it with other sources, which is what I did in this Leonardo case. But I respect your opinion. I guess we'll just see where the AFD goes. — Hunter Kahn (c) 17:23, 5 July 2009 (UTC)
DYK for Gallardosaurus
On DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.
Wizardman 08:51, 10 July 2009 (UTC)
HerrerasaurusHey J,
After tomorrow, I am going on a 10-day wikibreak out of state, and may not have a ton of internet access. With the assistance of a lot of folks (including you... thanks, BTW) Herrerasaurus made it to FA, but there are still grammar adjustments that an editor wants to make. Can you take a look? I'm worried I won't be able to devote (much/any) time to genuine concerns over clarity. Firsfron of Ronchester 01:39, 30 July 2009 (UTC)
Carniadactylus.
Loch Ness Monster
- I think s/he’s almost figured out what was needed. Now, if only s/he could figure out how to enter citations fully … — SpikeToronto (talk) 17:21, 14 September 2009 (UTC)
- Well, it looks like it's taken care of, which goes on the positive side in my book. Thank you for the help! J. Spencer (talk) 03:09, 15 September 2009 (UTC)
Those hadrosaurs sure liked to eat, huh?
The Original Barnstar
For substantial additions to the Hadrosaur diet article, I salute you! Abyssal (talk) 03:55, 4 October 2009 (UTC)
Fruitadens
ITN for Fruitadens
On 22 October 2009, In the news was updated with a news item that involved the article Fruitadens, which you substantially updated. If you know of another interesting news item involving a recently created or updated article, then please suggest it on the candidates page.
--BorgQueen (talk) 16:32, 22 October 2009 (UTC)
RajasaurusHi!Spencer,
Congratulations for the GA upgarde of the artcile. Also thanks.--Nvvchar (talk) 18:34, 22 October 2009 (UTC)
Eld's DeerHi! Spencer,
Thanks for the message regarding
Eld's Deer was posted by me on DYK quite some months back and accepted. Since you are an expert in Fauna, will you please advice me if I should post it for GA upgrade. Thanks.--Nvvchar (talk) 02:04, 23 October 2009 (UTC)]
Re: Rajasaurus ga-rev
New find of Dinosaurs nestling ground in IndiaHi! Spencer,
A few days back I had read the above news item in several news papers in India. I have prepared a short write up on the same for any suitable insertion in the Portal or News item. Please see here
User:Nvvchar/sandbox/Ashokan Edicts (Delhi). You may kndly edit it suitably and if it has not appeared on the News page of WP you may consider posting it as a joint news item. Thanks.--Nvvchar (talk) 05:16, 28 October 2009 (UTC)]
Ceratonykus
ScienceDirectHi J,
Do you have access to ScienceDirect? I don't want to pay $31.50 for a paper which discusses "Teleocrater", especially when I don't know how detailed the portion on "Teleocrater" is. The cladogram from their analysis is viewable here, but that doesn't give me much to work with. I figured you being you, you might subscribe to their (rather expensive) service. If not, I'll just leave "Teleo" as he is for now. Firsfron of Ronchester 04:09, 12 November 2009 (UTC)
- Thanks J. As it turns out, a reference librarian I work with has access to the paper, so I now have it. Thanks again for offering. Take care, Firsfron of Ronchester 00:25, 13 November 2009 (UTC)
"Name"?
I know the scientific name should type in Name. But i see lots of scientific name in wikipedia were type in "Name". Why?
Is that official rules that Nomen nudum, Nomen oblitum, Nomen dubium should type in "Name"? or it is just a wikipedia rules? User:Devilfish1962 01:43, 26 Nov. 2009 (UTC)
96.239.237.62Hi, Firs;
I noticed you reverted
Bayosaurus". Having fixed a string of their edits this morning, I am 99% certain that this is the latest version of an editor who was recently blocked at 96.242.198.33 (talk · contribs) for inserting false dates, locations, and other information to paleo articles, and false episodes and voice actors to television shows. Something to keep an eye on, I suppose. J. Spencer (talk) 16:21, 28 November 2009 (UTC)]
- Hi J. Thanks. I wasn't aware of that. Something else to watch out for is this. Firsfron of Ronchester 17:07, 28 November 2009 (UTC)
ThescelosaurusHey J,
It looks like the Hungarian version of Thescelosaurus has become a FA! You're making a difference, even in languages you don't speak. :) (At least, I assume you don't speak Hungarian...) Firsfron of Ronchester 05:52, 30 November 2009 (UTC)
- That's a really weird discovery. I have the 2008 archosauriform histology study at work (I left it on my desk and I'm at home now), and they still treated "Teleocrater" as if it wasn't described. Despite being undescribed, the 2008 study, too, did give a lot of detail (about half a page, as I recall), as well as some illustrations. How does something remain "undescribed" when there's that much detail? I'll take another look tomorrow, but I'm pretty sure the '08 study didn't mention a specific epithet (or I would definitely have mentioned it in the article), and it certainly didn't mention "Thecodontosaurus" alophos or alphos. Firsfron of Ronchester 05:22, 1 December 2009 (UTC)
An idea I wanted to run by you
- I'm glad you like the idea. I doubt Naish and the gang would get too involved, but where the two projects overlap, they may be willing to help. I'm gonna do some more brain storming, maybe a rough draft or two and then send the Dinolist a message. Abyssal (talk) 00:28, 3 December 2009 (UTC)
DYK for Stegomosuchus
On DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.
Materialscientist (talk) 11:44, 3 December 2009 (UTC)
Category:Cretaceous dinosaursHello J. Spencer, I have an advise about Category of Dinosaurs. At present, there are 56 articles in Category:Triassic dinosaurs, 245 articles in Category:Jurassic dinosaurs, and 617 articles in Category:Cretaceous dinosaurs.
However, Cretaceous is around 80 million years long, almost equaled to Late Triassic adding Jurassic. Besides, the Lower Cretaceous Dinosaurs group and Upper Cretaceous Dinosaurs group have obvious differences. My advise is that 「Category:Cretaceous dinosaurs」 can be divided into 「Category:Lower Cretaceous dinosaurs」 and 「Category:Upper Cretaceous dinosaurs」.
Also, I have a question about Dinosaurs in Pakistan. There seveal Dinosaurs found in Pakistan, such as:
Balochisaurus. My question is that whether Pakistan was a part of Indian-Madagascar in Cretaceous, or just a part of Asia continent. If Pakistan was a part of Indian-Madagascar, maybe the above articles should be moved into Category:Dinosaurs of India and Madagascar
hoseumou(talk) 13:59, 12 December 2009 (UTC)
Hadrosaur bipedality
- Fair enough, although I still think it shouldn't be included in the Jurassic Park article for two reasons: the work is unpublished; and perhaps more importantly, it's a bit unfair to call the JP people on it when it was perfectly legitimate to have bipedal running hadrosaurs in the 1990s. I think the page should stick to things that were known to be inaccurate or questionable at the time of production, like sizes and creative embellishments (intelligence, pretty much anything to do with Dilophosaurus, etc.). J. Spencer (talk) 04:39, 7 January 2010 (UTC)
Service awards proposal
Hello, J. Spencer/Archive 3! I noticed you display a service award, and would like to invite you to join the discussion over a proposed revamping of the awards.
If you have any opinions on the proposal, please participate in the discussion. Thanks! — the Man in Question (in question) 04:14, 8 January 2010 (UTC)
Kinkonychelys.
- Thank you very much! Oh no! It's not here!!! (talk) 08:00, 12 January 2010 (UTC)
- Hi again! Following your suggestions, I've gotten the page's main content up to 1227 characters, but of course, it still falls short of the DYK requirement by nearly 300 characters. The only information I can see in the paper about the genus that can still be included is the physical descriptions of the different specimens, and personal experience tells me I'm not too handy when it comes to understanding all of the scientific words used in these descriptions. I really want this article to become a DYK article, though, and I've already seen a few facts in what's been included that might "impress the judges" substantially for inclusion in a DYK update. If it's no trouble, and if any of that information is notable for inclusion in the article, could you please help with adding it in? That would be very much appreciated! Oh no! It's not here!!! (talk) 09:58, 12 January 2010 (UTC)
- Thanks again! Oh no! It's not here!!! (talk) 23:05, 12 January 2010 (UTC)
- Thanks a million, J. Spencer!!! Oh no! It's not here!!! (talk) 00:27, 13 January 2010 (UTC)
Talk:Dinosaur archiving
Deinonychus
- Thank you! I'm not actually very familiar with IPA, but people who are set up the templates on the dinosaur articles, and since this one's been stable for a long time, I figured it was probably a gag or a test edit. J. Spencer (talk) 00:50, 21 January 2010 (UTC)
- I cannot read IPA either - I merely "sounded it out", as you might phrase it. ;) -RadicalOne•Contact Me•Chase My Tail 02:44, 21 January 2010 (UTC)
WikiProject Dinosaurs in the Signpost
Redirects and categories
- Well, it doesn't really bother me either way; it just looked funny having it on a redirect. Species of Psittacosaurus
- I added comments o how to improve the article. GamerPro64 (talk) 01:59, 5 February 2010 (UTC)]
- I sorry to bother you but did you have me give suggestions to improve the article so you can improve the it or for someone else who would want to? GamerPro64 (talk) 23:18, 6 February 2010 (UTC).
- Thank you, J. Spencer!!! Oh no! It's not here!!! (talk) 23:39, 7 February 2010 (UTC)
Reply
Rhabdognathus.
- Okay then. Thank you for the links! Oh no! It's not here!!! (talk) 07:25, 2 March 2010 (UTC)
Linheraptor.
- Thanks! Oh no! It's not here!!! (talk) 02:31, 21 March 2010 (UTC)
Guanlong imageHello,
I've uploaded some images yesterday and put them with some articles.
You said that my images weren't the kind that you're looking for.
Is this one a bit better?
Guanlong wucaii Kind regards from 82.169.6.135 (talk) 13:45, 1 April 2010 (UTC) or better known as Joerim on the Dutch Wikipedia.
Welcome back
Re: Penghusuchus
Brachi and Giraffatitan
- I am torn between keeping a tidy list at the bottom and placing them at first use. I guess the latter is simply more common, and also easier to work with once the text doesn't change much anymore. However, writing the Plateosaurus article showed me that for a total re-write a list at the end would have been better - I spent lots of time searching through the editor. So I guess I'll keep the alphabetical list, and once the text is ready for the main page I'll place the citation at the first use. HMallison (talk) 06:08, 12 May 2010 (UTC)
You're quite right to prod me - however, I must point to the sauropoda re-write, which is devloping into a physiology of dinosaurs update.... I had some rough weeks, work and kids' health wise, but hope to contribute the missing data within the next few days. Then the text will need a thorough massage - was that you vounteering??? ;) HMallison (talk) 06:45, 15 June 2010 (UTC)
- Give me a day or two more, and I'll have a rough structure ready. Then we should talk about it - may or may not be best to use your structure. HMallison (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 15:57, 16 June 2010 (UTC).
If you're into sauropods....here's a must read for you :) Long, boring, but a "deal-breaker", 'cause it has all you ever need to know and cite (I hope).
http://www3.interscience.wiley.com/cgi-bin/fulltext/123397084/HTMLSTART
PDF here:
http://www3.interscience.wiley.com/cgi-bin/fulltext/123397084/PDFSTART
HMallison (talk) 23:35, 16 May 2010 (UTC)
- well, it took me three years to understand it all - but that did involve the research, too ;) Aachenosaurus
- Dunno. I've gone ahead and semi-protected for a month. We'll see if it deters this fellow or fellows. Only the pages listed at Wikipedia:Pending changes/Testing are to be flagged for pending changes. Firsfron of Ronchester 04:10, 9 July 2010 (UTC)
Family treeHi, I'm from the Dutch Wikipedia. Because I want an article to be finished tommorow (I'm going on holliday) I needed help from someone quikly, so I come to you. Maybe you still know me from the illustration of the Guanlong. Here's the problem:
<font color="white">unnamed
<font color="white">unnamed
<font color="white">unnamed
Champsosauridae
<font color="white">unnamed
familie Simoedosauridae
<font color="white">unnamed
?
Champsosauridae
I've got two family trees. The upper one is good, but in front of it there has to be "familie Simoedosauridae", like with the second one. Can you help me, please? Kind regards from 82.169.6.135 (talk) 19:48, 14 July 2010 (UTC) or Joerim, as I'm known at the Dutch Wikipedia.
- Thank you very much! Only one thing, what mistake did I make when making one of these family trees? Kind regards from 82.169.6.135 (talk) 07:35, 15 July 2010 (UTC) or Joerim
Talkback
Concavenator imageHi, I uploaded an image to Concavenator but it was removed due to it not being anatomically rigorous. I did a new one, which is here http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Conc2.png I used this image http://images.nationalgeographic.com/wpf/media-live/photos/000/257/cache/humpback-dinosaur-life-reconstruction_25710_600x450.jpg as a model, but I don't know if mine is yet fit to be used in the article. Any help on how are images judged would be very appreciated (I also posted all this on the article's talk page but I don't know if it will get much attention there).
thank you very much
Nestor db (talk) 18:44, 10 September 2010 (UTC)
Parks ref
-
Thanks
Dibothrosuchus
- Done! talk) 19:49, 7 March 2009 (UTC)
DYK for Miragaia (dinosaur)
On Miragaia (dinosaur), which you recently nominated. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.
Royalbroil 02:11, 6 March 2009 (UTC)
Edmontosaurus
DYK for Phyllodontosuchus
On March 9, 2009, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Phyllodontosuchus, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.
Shubinator (talk) 00:23, 9 March 2009 (UTC)
DYK for Dibothrosuchus
On March 12, 2009, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Dibothrosuchus, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.
Congratulations! PeterSymonds (talk) 22:13, 12 March 2009 (UTC)
Edmontosaurus
The entire article needs its prose reviewed; I merely listed items from the lead for starters. Regarding the use of animal: it's good to state the obvious, it's an easy-to-grasp non-jargon-y word, and it saves you from having to say the animal's name or "it" a lot. 05:01, 17 March 2009 (UTC)
DYK
Argentinosaurus againHello, I search for help about Argentinosaurus again. It seems that there are three papers about Argentinosaurus in 90s, such as:
- Appenzeller, T. 1994. Argentine dinos vie for heavyweight titles. Science 266, 1805.
- Paul, G.S. 1994. Is Garden Park home to the world’s largest known land animal? Garden Park Paleontology Society 4, 5.
- Paul, G.S. 1997. Dinosaur models: the good, the bad, and using them to estimate the mass of dinosaurs. In Wolberg, D.L., Stump, E. and Rosenberg, G.D. (eds), DinoFest International Proceedings, pp
But i can't find these papers in internet. Can you search these papers, and find out the length and weight of Argentinosaurus in these papers?
I'll be very thankful if you can help me, thanks. hoseumou 08:40, 28 March 2009 (UTC)
- Thanks you for your answer. But i have a question, it seems that [Early reconstructions estimated...] directly comes from Dinosaur Mailing List. Is that techniquely enough to be a reference? Finally, I have to say I very admired your dinosaur article, such as Edmontosaurus. :) hoseumou 07:43, 31 March 2009 (UTC)
QuinceratopsHi, Firs;
You'd better nail the article, too. J. Spencer (talk) 18:02, 24 May 2009 (UTC)
- Thanks J. The article was still redlinked when I removed it from Ceratopsidae. I'm not sure what to do about the image on Commons, File:Quinceratops 03869.JPG. Probably someone should be notified. Firsfron of Ronchester 18:15, 24 May 2009 (UTC)
- Moab man can probably be salvaged, given time (and a little TNT). Firsfron of Ronchester 19:33, 24 May 2009 (UTC)]
Piveteausaurus
RajasaurusHi! Spencer,
The following are quoated from Rjanag's talk page.
May I request you to please revisit the above article to review the tag, since another expert on the subject has edited it?--Nvvchar (talk) 09:46, 16 May 2009 (UTC)
- Hey Nvvchar, sorry it's taken me so long to get back. Anyway, it would probably be better to ask J. Spencer about this, since he's the one who did the rewriting and he's more familiar with the content. I'm sure that if he went through it it's probably all fine now, but I'd feel more comfortable letting him remove the tag (since he knows what the state of the article is, whereas all I can do right now is assume—and I'd rather not go through one sentence at a time, as JSpencer probably already has). rʨanaɢ talk/contribs 21:18, 30 May 2009 (UTC)
Since, as a well known expert in the field, you have edited the version of Rajasaurus after Rjanag,s tag, which was earlier also edited by a group of users of the
Dinosaurs Portal with extensive experience in this field, would you kindly consider removing the tag on the article? I am in the process of getting some pictures of Rajasuarus model erected in Lucknow India posted on the article. Thanks--Nvvchar (talk) 02:58, 31 May 2009 (UTC)]
- Thank you very much. I hope I will have opportunities in the near future on the ]
- Can you nominate this article for GA status since it is already assessed as "B" class and many of
Dinosaurs portal members like yourself and others have put in a lot of effort to improve it?--Nvvchar (talk) 15:37, 1 August 2009 (UTC)]
Heterodontosauridae
- I highly doubt that somebody would consider it OR, but it's better to be safe than sorry. Thanks for contacting the other editor, and hopefully a source can be found for it. --Happy editing! Nehrams2020 (talk • contrib) 05:04, 2 June 2009 (UTC)
Piveteau's brain probably was bigger than a walnut
- I think it's great. I think he was a scientific illustrator also; although many scientists at the time did their own illustrations, he was known for his. I tried to confirm this information to include in the article but found nothing specific. The illustrations can be included in both the dinosaur and bio articles, if you can get decent copies. If you don't get decent copies, and I have time, I can resketch at least the most important one of them if they're out of copyright. --69.226.103.13 (talk) 22:56, 2 June 2009 (UTC)
User 173.35.129.119 issues....I just undid a half dozen bad edits of his...again. He just got the temporary ban lifted and is right back at it..
it's gotten to where someone needs to get a perma ban put on that IP address. It's vandalism at this point. I don't know if you have that ability or can get in contact with someone who does, but it's really time. Forescore68 (talk) 16:15, 13 June 2009 (UTC)
- Oh, and thanks for cleaning up my Chuandongocoelurus mess...I did it in a huffy. Glad I don't lose points in this forum for being hasty and dumb...Forescore68 (talk) 02:33, 18 June 2009 (UTC)
Italictitle templateHi, Firs;
I just found out something useful about the italictitle template: I already knew that if it is put at the top, it prevents the uppermost [edit] bracket from showing. However, if it's put below the taxobox, as Bob did at Pteranodon and I just did with Allosaurus, it doesn't interfere. I don't know if this has editing drawbacks, but it's very good to know we can get back the edit bracket for the lede section, especially for ginormous articles. J. Spencer (talk) 01:35, 17 June 2009 (UTC)
- Hey!
- I didn't realize it prevents the uppermost edit link from showing. We might want to bring this up at tree of life. Either this should be fixed through the template itself, or I could possibly AWB it; I think there is a pretty easy way to delete the template name while substituting the same template name immediately below the taxobox. If this is acceptable to you (and everyone else who works in these areas), I could work on this tomorrow. Thanks for catching this. Firsfron of Ronchester 06:17, 17 June 2009 (UTC).
- P.S. Also, I'd like to make sure I interpreted everything I've included in the article correctly. Thanks in advance! Mess around with the guy in shades all you like - don't mess around with the girl in gloves! (talk) 08:28, 26 June 2009 (UTC)
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template. Mess around with the guy in shades all you like - don't mess around with the girl in gloves! (talk) 00:41, 27 June 2009 (UTC)
- I reveiewed the DYK hook for this, and everything looks fine except that I had some minor wording changes to the hook. If you are okay with those changes, please indicate so in its DYK submission at Template talk:Did You Know#Gallardosaurus and I can approve the hook. Rlendog (talk) 02:17, 8 July 2009 (UTC)]
New hoaxHi, Firs;
Here's a new one to nail, if it's still here by the time you read this: Rorasaurus. J. Spencer (talk) 13:19, 1 July 2009 (UTC)
(I'd watch Roarasaurus too, as they may try to recreate it.) J. Spencer (talk) 13:27, 1 July 2009 (UTC)
- Thanks. I've just nuked it. Firsfron of Ronchester 13:53, 1 July 2009 (UTC)
- Yeah, I'm going to start re-inquiring about the possibility of fixing WP:DABS. As you say, if some random IP hadn't added the name to the List, you wouldn't have noticed it. That's not good. Firsfron of Ronchester 00:47, 2 July 2009 (UTC)
- It's true: DABS was just one way of catching potential hoaxes (or very short new articles that editors sometimes create), but it was nice to have that option. Firsfron of Ronchester 04:32, 2 July 2009 (UTC)
- I had no idea it would be that easy. Request, and within an hour, voila! Firsfron of Ronchester 03:21, 13 July 2009 (UTC)
Thanks...
ITN for Australovenator, Diamantinasaurus and Wintonotitan
On In the news candidates page.
--BorgQueen (talk) 20:14, 4 July 2009 (UTC)
2009 hadrosaur chewing study
- I think with any article (media or not) there is a possibility of inaccuracies; that's why we check it with other sources, which is what I did in this Leonardo case. But I respect your opinion. I guess we'll just see where the AFD goes. — Hunter Kahn (c) 17:23, 5 July 2009 (UTC)
DYK for Gallardosaurus
On DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.
Wizardman 08:51, 10 July 2009 (UTC)
HerrerasaurusHey J,
After tomorrow, I am going on a 10-day wikibreak out of state, and may not have a ton of internet access. With the assistance of a lot of folks (including you... thanks, BTW) Herrerasaurus made it to FA, but there are still grammar adjustments that an editor wants to make. Can you take a look? I'm worried I won't be able to devote (much/any) time to genuine concerns over clarity. Firsfron of Ronchester 01:39, 30 July 2009 (UTC)
Carniadactylus.
Loch Ness Monster
- I think s/he’s almost figured out what was needed. Now, if only s/he could figure out how to enter citations fully … — SpikeToronto (talk) 17:21, 14 September 2009 (UTC)
- Well, it looks like it's taken care of, which goes on the positive side in my book. Thank you for the help! J. Spencer (talk) 03:09, 15 September 2009 (UTC)
Those hadrosaurs sure liked to eat, huh?
The Original Barnstar
For substantial additions to the Hadrosaur diet article, I salute you! Abyssal (talk) 03:55, 4 October 2009 (UTC)
Fruitadens
ITN for Fruitadens
On 22 October 2009, In the news was updated with a news item that involved the article Fruitadens, which you substantially updated. If you know of another interesting news item involving a recently created or updated article, then please suggest it on the candidates page.
--BorgQueen (talk) 16:32, 22 October 2009 (UTC)
RajasaurusHi!Spencer,
Congratulations for the GA upgarde of the artcile. Also thanks.--Nvvchar (talk) 18:34, 22 October 2009 (UTC)
Eld's DeerHi! Spencer,
Thanks for the message regarding
Eld's Deer was posted by me on DYK quite some months back and accepted. Since you are an expert in Fauna, will you please advice me if I should post it for GA upgrade. Thanks.--Nvvchar (talk) 02:04, 23 October 2009 (UTC)]
Re: Rajasaurus ga-rev
New find of Dinosaurs nestling ground in IndiaHi! Spencer,
A few days back I had read the above news item in several news papers in India. I have prepared a short write up on the same for any suitable insertion in the Portal or News item. Please see here
User:Nvvchar/sandbox/Ashokan Edicts (Delhi). You may kndly edit it suitably and if it has not appeared on the News page of WP you may consider posting it as a joint news item. Thanks.--Nvvchar (talk) 05:16, 28 October 2009 (UTC)]
Ceratonykus
ScienceDirectHi J,
Do you have access to ScienceDirect? I don't want to pay $31.50 for a paper which discusses "Teleocrater", especially when I don't know how detailed the portion on "Teleocrater" is. The cladogram from their analysis is viewable here, but that doesn't give me much to work with. I figured you being you, you might subscribe to their (rather expensive) service. If not, I'll just leave "Teleo" as he is for now. Firsfron of Ronchester 04:09, 12 November 2009 (UTC)
- Thanks J. As it turns out, a reference librarian I work with has access to the paper, so I now have it. Thanks again for offering. Take care, Firsfron of Ronchester 00:25, 13 November 2009 (UTC)
"Name"?
I know the scientific name should type in Name. But i see lots of scientific name in wikipedia were type in "Name". Why?
Is that official rules that Nomen nudum, Nomen oblitum, Nomen dubium should type in "Name"? or it is just a wikipedia rules? User:Devilfish1962 01:43, 26 Nov. 2009 (UTC)
96.239.237.62Hi, Firs;
I noticed you reverted
Bayosaurus". Having fixed a string of their edits this morning, I am 99% certain that this is the latest version of an editor who was recently blocked at 96.242.198.33 (talk · contribs) for inserting false dates, locations, and other information to paleo articles, and false episodes and voice actors to television shows. Something to keep an eye on, I suppose. J. Spencer (talk) 16:21, 28 November 2009 (UTC)]
- Hi J. Thanks. I wasn't aware of that. Something else to watch out for is this. Firsfron of Ronchester 17:07, 28 November 2009 (UTC)
ThescelosaurusHey J,
It looks like the Hungarian version of Thescelosaurus has become a FA! You're making a difference, even in languages you don't speak. :) (At least, I assume you don't speak Hungarian...) Firsfron of Ronchester 05:52, 30 November 2009 (UTC)
- That's a really weird discovery. I have the 2008 archosauriform histology study at work (I left it on my desk and I'm at home now), and they still treated "Teleocrater" as if it wasn't described. Despite being undescribed, the 2008 study, too, did give a lot of detail (about half a page, as I recall), as well as some illustrations. How does something remain "undescribed" when there's that much detail? I'll take another look tomorrow, but I'm pretty sure the '08 study didn't mention a specific epithet (or I would definitely have mentioned it in the article), and it certainly didn't mention "Thecodontosaurus" alophos or alphos. Firsfron of Ronchester 05:22, 1 December 2009 (UTC)
An idea I wanted to run by you
- I'm glad you like the idea. I doubt Naish and the gang would get too involved, but where the two projects overlap, they may be willing to help. I'm gonna do some more brain storming, maybe a rough draft or two and then send the Dinolist a message. Abyssal (talk) 00:28, 3 December 2009 (UTC)
DYK for Stegomosuchus
On DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.
Materialscientist (talk) 11:44, 3 December 2009 (UTC)
Category:Cretaceous dinosaursHello J. Spencer, I have an advise about Category of Dinosaurs. At present, there are 56 articles in Category:Triassic dinosaurs, 245 articles in Category:Jurassic dinosaurs, and 617 articles in Category:Cretaceous dinosaurs.
However, Cretaceous is around 80 million years long, almost equaled to Late Triassic adding Jurassic. Besides, the Lower Cretaceous Dinosaurs group and Upper Cretaceous Dinosaurs group have obvious differences. My advise is that 「Category:Cretaceous dinosaurs」 can be divided into 「Category:Lower Cretaceous dinosaurs」 and 「Category:Upper Cretaceous dinosaurs」.
Also, I have a question about Dinosaurs in Pakistan. There seveal Dinosaurs found in Pakistan, such as:
Balochisaurus. My question is that whether Pakistan was a part of Indian-Madagascar in Cretaceous, or just a part of Asia continent. If Pakistan was a part of Indian-Madagascar, maybe the above articles should be moved into Category:Dinosaurs of India and Madagascar
hoseumou(talk) 13:59, 12 December 2009 (UTC)
Hadrosaur bipedality
- Fair enough, although I still think it shouldn't be included in the Jurassic Park article for two reasons: the work is unpublished; and perhaps more importantly, it's a bit unfair to call the JP people on it when it was perfectly legitimate to have bipedal running hadrosaurs in the 1990s. I think the page should stick to things that were known to be inaccurate or questionable at the time of production, like sizes and creative embellishments (intelligence, pretty much anything to do with Dilophosaurus, etc.). J. Spencer (talk) 04:39, 7 January 2010 (UTC)
Service awards proposal
Hello, J. Spencer/Archive 3! I noticed you display a service award, and would like to invite you to join the discussion over a proposed revamping of the awards.
If you have any opinions on the proposal, please participate in the discussion. Thanks! — the Man in Question (in question) 04:14, 8 January 2010 (UTC)
Kinkonychelys.
- Thank you very much! Oh no! It's not here!!! (talk) 08:00, 12 January 2010 (UTC)
- Hi again! Following your suggestions, I've gotten the page's main content up to 1227 characters, but of course, it still falls short of the DYK requirement by nearly 300 characters. The only information I can see in the paper about the genus that can still be included is the physical descriptions of the different specimens, and personal experience tells me I'm not too handy when it comes to understanding all of the scientific words used in these descriptions. I really want this article to become a DYK article, though, and I've already seen a few facts in what's been included that might "impress the judges" substantially for inclusion in a DYK update. If it's no trouble, and if any of that information is notable for inclusion in the article, could you please help with adding it in? That would be very much appreciated! Oh no! It's not here!!! (talk) 09:58, 12 January 2010 (UTC)
- Thanks again! Oh no! It's not here!!! (talk) 23:05, 12 January 2010 (UTC)
- Thanks a million, J. Spencer!!! Oh no! It's not here!!! (talk) 00:27, 13 January 2010 (UTC)
Talk:Dinosaur archiving
Deinonychus
- Thank you! I'm not actually very familiar with IPA, but people who are set up the templates on the dinosaur articles, and since this one's been stable for a long time, I figured it was probably a gag or a test edit. J. Spencer (talk) 00:50, 21 January 2010 (UTC)
- I cannot read IPA either - I merely "sounded it out", as you might phrase it. ;) -RadicalOne•Contact Me•Chase My Tail 02:44, 21 January 2010 (UTC)
WikiProject Dinosaurs in the Signpost
Redirects and categories
- Well, it doesn't really bother me either way; it just looked funny having it on a redirect. Species of Psittacosaurus
- I added comments o how to improve the article. GamerPro64 (talk) 01:59, 5 February 2010 (UTC)]
- I sorry to bother you but did you have me give suggestions to improve the article so you can improve the it or for someone else who would want to? GamerPro64 (talk) 23:18, 6 February 2010 (UTC).
- Thank you, J. Spencer!!! Oh no! It's not here!!! (talk) 23:39, 7 February 2010 (UTC)
Reply
Rhabdognathus.
- Okay then. Thank you for the links! Oh no! It's not here!!! (talk) 07:25, 2 March 2010 (UTC)
Linheraptor.
- Thanks! Oh no! It's not here!!! (talk) 02:31, 21 March 2010 (UTC)
Guanlong imageHello,
I've uploaded some images yesterday and put them with some articles.
You said that my images weren't the kind that you're looking for.
Is this one a bit better?
Guanlong wucaii Kind regards from 82.169.6.135 (talk) 13:45, 1 April 2010 (UTC) or better known as Joerim on the Dutch Wikipedia.
Welcome back
Re: Penghusuchus
Brachi and Giraffatitan
- I am torn between keeping a tidy list at the bottom and placing them at first use. I guess the latter is simply more common, and also easier to work with once the text doesn't change much anymore. However, writing the Plateosaurus article showed me that for a total re-write a list at the end would have been better - I spent lots of time searching through the editor. So I guess I'll keep the alphabetical list, and once the text is ready for the main page I'll place the citation at the first use. HMallison (talk) 06:08, 12 May 2010 (UTC)
You're quite right to prod me - however, I must point to the sauropoda re-write, which is devloping into a physiology of dinosaurs update.... I had some rough weeks, work and kids' health wise, but hope to contribute the missing data within the next few days. Then the text will need a thorough massage - was that you vounteering??? ;) HMallison (talk) 06:45, 15 June 2010 (UTC)
- Give me a day or two more, and I'll have a rough structure ready. Then we should talk about it - may or may not be best to use your structure. HMallison (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 15:57, 16 June 2010 (UTC).
If you're into sauropods....here's a must read for you :) Long, boring, but a "deal-breaker", 'cause it has all you ever need to know and cite (I hope).
http://www3.interscience.wiley.com/cgi-bin/fulltext/123397084/HTMLSTART
PDF here:
http://www3.interscience.wiley.com/cgi-bin/fulltext/123397084/PDFSTART
HMallison (talk) 23:35, 16 May 2010 (UTC)
- well, it took me three years to understand it all - but that did involve the research, too ;) Aachenosaurus
- Dunno. I've gone ahead and semi-protected for a month. We'll see if it deters this fellow or fellows. Only the pages listed at Wikipedia:Pending changes/Testing are to be flagged for pending changes. Firsfron of Ronchester 04:10, 9 July 2010 (UTC)
Family treeHi, I'm from the Dutch Wikipedia. Because I want an article to be finished tommorow (I'm going on holliday) I needed help from someone quikly, so I come to you. Maybe you still know me from the illustration of the Guanlong. Here's the problem:
<font color="white">unnamed
<font color="white">unnamed
<font color="white">unnamed
Champsosauridae
<font color="white">unnamed
familie Simoedosauridae
<font color="white">unnamed
?
Champsosauridae
I've got two family trees. The upper one is good, but in front of it there has to be "familie Simoedosauridae", like with the second one. Can you help me, please? Kind regards from 82.169.6.135 (talk) 19:48, 14 July 2010 (UTC) or Joerim, as I'm known at the Dutch Wikipedia.
- Thank you very much! Only one thing, what mistake did I make when making one of these family trees? Kind regards from 82.169.6.135 (talk) 07:35, 15 July 2010 (UTC) or Joerim
Talkback
Concavenator imageHi, I uploaded an image to Concavenator but it was removed due to it not being anatomically rigorous. I did a new one, which is here http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Conc2.png I used this image http://images.nationalgeographic.com/wpf/media-live/photos/000/257/cache/humpback-dinosaur-life-reconstruction_25710_600x450.jpg as a model, but I don't know if mine is yet fit to be used in the article. Any help on how are images judged would be very appreciated (I also posted all this on the article's talk page but I don't know if it will get much attention there).
thank you very much
Nestor db (talk) 18:44, 10 September 2010 (UTC)
Parks ref
-
Dibothrosuchus
- Done! talk) 19:49, 7 March 2009 (UTC)
DYK for Miragaia (dinosaur)
On Miragaia (dinosaur), which you recently nominated. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.
DYK for Miragaia (dinosaur)
Royalbroil 02:11, 6 March 2009 (UTC)
Edmontosaurus
DYK for Phyllodontosuchus
On March 9, 2009, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Phyllodontosuchus, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.
Shubinator (talk) 00:23, 9 March 2009 (UTC)
DYK for Dibothrosuchus
On March 12, 2009, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Dibothrosuchus, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.
DYK for Phyllodontosuchus
DYK for Dibothrosuchus
Congratulations! PeterSymonds (talk) 22:13, 12 March 2009 (UTC)
Edmontosaurus
The entire article needs its prose reviewed; I merely listed items from the lead for starters. Regarding the use of animal: it's good to state the obvious, it's an easy-to-grasp non-jargon-y word, and it saves you from having to say the animal's name or "it" a lot. 05:01, 17 March 2009 (UTC)
DYK
Argentinosaurus againHello, I search for help about Argentinosaurus again. It seems that there are three papers about Argentinosaurus in 90s, such as:
- Appenzeller, T. 1994. Argentine dinos vie for heavyweight titles. Science 266, 1805.
- Paul, G.S. 1994. Is Garden Park home to the world’s largest known land animal? Garden Park Paleontology Society 4, 5.
- Paul, G.S. 1997. Dinosaur models: the good, the bad, and using them to estimate the mass of dinosaurs. In Wolberg, D.L., Stump, E. and Rosenberg, G.D. (eds), DinoFest International Proceedings, pp
But i can't find these papers in internet. Can you search these papers, and find out the length and weight of Argentinosaurus in these papers?
I'll be very thankful if you can help me, thanks. hoseumou 08:40, 28 March 2009 (UTC)
- Thanks you for your answer. But i have a question, it seems that [Early reconstructions estimated...] directly comes from Dinosaur Mailing List. Is that techniquely enough to be a reference? Finally, I have to say I very admired your dinosaur article, such as Edmontosaurus. :) hoseumou 07:43, 31 March 2009 (UTC)
QuinceratopsHi, Firs;
You'd better nail the article, too. J. Spencer (talk) 18:02, 24 May 2009 (UTC)
- Thanks J. The article was still redlinked when I removed it from Ceratopsidae. I'm not sure what to do about the image on Commons, File:Quinceratops 03869.JPG. Probably someone should be notified. Firsfron of Ronchester 18:15, 24 May 2009 (UTC)
- Moab man can probably be salvaged, given time (and a little TNT). Firsfron of Ronchester 19:33, 24 May 2009 (UTC)]
Piveteausaurus
RajasaurusHi! Spencer,
The following are quoated from Rjanag's talk page.
May I request you to please revisit the above article to review the tag, since another expert on the subject has edited it?--Nvvchar (talk) 09:46, 16 May 2009 (UTC)
- Hey Nvvchar, sorry it's taken me so long to get back. Anyway, it would probably be better to ask J. Spencer about this, since he's the one who did the rewriting and he's more familiar with the content. I'm sure that if he went through it it's probably all fine now, but I'd feel more comfortable letting him remove the tag (since he knows what the state of the article is, whereas all I can do right now is assume—and I'd rather not go through one sentence at a time, as JSpencer probably already has). rʨanaɢ talk/contribs 21:18, 30 May 2009 (UTC)
Since, as a well known expert in the field, you have edited the version of Rajasaurus after Rjanag,s tag, which was earlier also edited by a group of users of the
Dinosaurs Portal with extensive experience in this field, would you kindly consider removing the tag on the article? I am in the process of getting some pictures of Rajasuarus model erected in Lucknow India posted on the article. Thanks--Nvvchar (talk) 02:58, 31 May 2009 (UTC)]
- Thank you very much. I hope I will have opportunities in the near future on the ]
- Can you nominate this article for GA status since it is already assessed as "B" class and many of
Dinosaurs portal members like yourself and others have put in a lot of effort to improve it?--Nvvchar (talk) 15:37, 1 August 2009 (UTC)]
Heterodontosauridae
- I highly doubt that somebody would consider it OR, but it's better to be safe than sorry. Thanks for contacting the other editor, and hopefully a source can be found for it. --Happy editing! Nehrams2020 (talk • contrib) 05:04, 2 June 2009 (UTC)
Piveteau's brain probably was bigger than a walnut
- I think it's great. I think he was a scientific illustrator also; although many scientists at the time did their own illustrations, he was known for his. I tried to confirm this information to include in the article but found nothing specific. The illustrations can be included in both the dinosaur and bio articles, if you can get decent copies. If you don't get decent copies, and I have time, I can resketch at least the most important one of them if they're out of copyright. --69.226.103.13 (talk) 22:56, 2 June 2009 (UTC)
User 173.35.129.119 issues....I just undid a half dozen bad edits of his...again. He just got the temporary ban lifted and is right back at it..
it's gotten to where someone needs to get a perma ban put on that IP address. It's vandalism at this point. I don't know if you have that ability or can get in contact with someone who does, but it's really time. Forescore68 (talk) 16:15, 13 June 2009 (UTC)
- Oh, and thanks for cleaning up my Chuandongocoelurus mess...I did it in a huffy. Glad I don't lose points in this forum for being hasty and dumb...Forescore68 (talk) 02:33, 18 June 2009 (UTC)
Italictitle templateHi, Firs;
I just found out something useful about the italictitle template: I already knew that if it is put at the top, it prevents the uppermost [edit] bracket from showing. However, if it's put below the taxobox, as Bob did at Pteranodon and I just did with Allosaurus, it doesn't interfere. I don't know if this has editing drawbacks, but it's very good to know we can get back the edit bracket for the lede section, especially for ginormous articles. J. Spencer (talk) 01:35, 17 June 2009 (UTC)
- Hey!
- I didn't realize it prevents the uppermost edit link from showing. We might want to bring this up at tree of life. Either this should be fixed through the template itself, or I could possibly AWB it; I think there is a pretty easy way to delete the template name while substituting the same template name immediately below the taxobox. If this is acceptable to you (and everyone else who works in these areas), I could work on this tomorrow. Thanks for catching this. Firsfron of Ronchester 06:17, 17 June 2009 (UTC).
- P.S. Also, I'd like to make sure I interpreted everything I've included in the article correctly. Thanks in advance! Mess around with the guy in shades all you like - don't mess around with the girl in gloves! (talk) 08:28, 26 June 2009 (UTC)
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template. Mess around with the guy in shades all you like - don't mess around with the girl in gloves! (talk) 00:41, 27 June 2009 (UTC)
- I reveiewed the DYK hook for this, and everything looks fine except that I had some minor wording changes to the hook. If you are okay with those changes, please indicate so in its DYK submission at Template talk:Did You Know#Gallardosaurus and I can approve the hook. Rlendog (talk) 02:17, 8 July 2009 (UTC)]
New hoaxHi, Firs;
Here's a new one to nail, if it's still here by the time you read this: Rorasaurus. J. Spencer (talk) 13:19, 1 July 2009 (UTC)
(I'd watch Roarasaurus too, as they may try to recreate it.) J. Spencer (talk) 13:27, 1 July 2009 (UTC)
- Thanks. I've just nuked it. Firsfron of Ronchester 13:53, 1 July 2009 (UTC)
- Yeah, I'm going to start re-inquiring about the possibility of fixing WP:DABS. As you say, if some random IP hadn't added the name to the List, you wouldn't have noticed it. That's not good. Firsfron of Ronchester 00:47, 2 July 2009 (UTC)
- It's true: DABS was just one way of catching potential hoaxes (or very short new articles that editors sometimes create), but it was nice to have that option. Firsfron of Ronchester 04:32, 2 July 2009 (UTC)
- I had no idea it would be that easy. Request, and within an hour, voila! Firsfron of Ronchester 03:21, 13 July 2009 (UTC)
Thanks...
ITN for Australovenator, Diamantinasaurus and Wintonotitan
On In the news candidates page.
--BorgQueen (talk) 20:14, 4 July 2009 (UTC)
2009 hadrosaur chewing study
- I think with any article (media or not) there is a possibility of inaccuracies; that's why we check it with other sources, which is what I did in this Leonardo case. But I respect your opinion. I guess we'll just see where the AFD goes. — Hunter Kahn (c) 17:23, 5 July 2009 (UTC)
DYK for Gallardosaurus
On DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.
Wizardman 08:51, 10 July 2009 (UTC)
HerrerasaurusHey J,
After tomorrow, I am going on a 10-day wikibreak out of state, and may not have a ton of internet access. With the assistance of a lot of folks (including you... thanks, BTW) Herrerasaurus made it to FA, but there are still grammar adjustments that an editor wants to make. Can you take a look? I'm worried I won't be able to devote (much/any) time to genuine concerns over clarity. Firsfron of Ronchester 01:39, 30 July 2009 (UTC)
Carniadactylus.
Loch Ness Monster
- I think s/he’s almost figured out what was needed. Now, if only s/he could figure out how to enter citations fully … — SpikeToronto (talk) 17:21, 14 September 2009 (UTC)
- Well, it looks like it's taken care of, which goes on the positive side in my book. Thank you for the help! J. Spencer (talk) 03:09, 15 September 2009 (UTC)
Those hadrosaurs sure liked to eat, huh?
The Original Barnstar
For substantial additions to the Hadrosaur diet article, I salute you! Abyssal (talk) 03:55, 4 October 2009 (UTC)
Fruitadens
ITN for Fruitadens
On 22 October 2009, In the news was updated with a news item that involved the article Fruitadens, which you substantially updated. If you know of another interesting news item involving a recently created or updated article, then please suggest it on the candidates page.
--BorgQueen (talk) 16:32, 22 October 2009 (UTC)
RajasaurusHi!Spencer,
Congratulations for the GA upgarde of the artcile. Also thanks.--Nvvchar (talk) 18:34, 22 October 2009 (UTC)
Eld's DeerHi! Spencer,
Thanks for the message regarding
Eld's Deer was posted by me on DYK quite some months back and accepted. Since you are an expert in Fauna, will you please advice me if I should post it for GA upgrade. Thanks.--Nvvchar (talk) 02:04, 23 October 2009 (UTC)]
Re: Rajasaurus ga-rev
New find of Dinosaurs nestling ground in IndiaHi! Spencer,
A few days back I had read the above news item in several news papers in India. I have prepared a short write up on the same for any suitable insertion in the Portal or News item. Please see here
User:Nvvchar/sandbox/Ashokan Edicts (Delhi). You may kndly edit it suitably and if it has not appeared on the News page of WP you may consider posting it as a joint news item. Thanks.--Nvvchar (talk) 05:16, 28 October 2009 (UTC)]
Ceratonykus
ScienceDirectHi J,
Do you have access to ScienceDirect? I don't want to pay $31.50 for a paper which discusses "Teleocrater", especially when I don't know how detailed the portion on "Teleocrater" is. The cladogram from their analysis is viewable here, but that doesn't give me much to work with. I figured you being you, you might subscribe to their (rather expensive) service. If not, I'll just leave "Teleo" as he is for now. Firsfron of Ronchester 04:09, 12 November 2009 (UTC)
- Thanks J. As it turns out, a reference librarian I work with has access to the paper, so I now have it. Thanks again for offering. Take care, Firsfron of Ronchester 00:25, 13 November 2009 (UTC)
"Name"?
I know the scientific name should type in Name. But i see lots of scientific name in wikipedia were type in "Name". Why?
Is that official rules that Nomen nudum, Nomen oblitum, Nomen dubium should type in "Name"? or it is just a wikipedia rules? User:Devilfish1962 01:43, 26 Nov. 2009 (UTC)
96.239.237.62Hi, Firs;
I noticed you reverted
Bayosaurus". Having fixed a string of their edits this morning, I am 99% certain that this is the latest version of an editor who was recently blocked at 96.242.198.33 (talk · contribs) for inserting false dates, locations, and other information to paleo articles, and false episodes and voice actors to television shows. Something to keep an eye on, I suppose. J. Spencer (talk) 16:21, 28 November 2009 (UTC)]
- Hi J. Thanks. I wasn't aware of that. Something else to watch out for is this. Firsfron of Ronchester 17:07, 28 November 2009 (UTC)
ThescelosaurusHey J,
It looks like the Hungarian version of Thescelosaurus has become a FA! You're making a difference, even in languages you don't speak. :) (At least, I assume you don't speak Hungarian...) Firsfron of Ronchester 05:52, 30 November 2009 (UTC)
- That's a really weird discovery. I have the 2008 archosauriform histology study at work (I left it on my desk and I'm at home now), and they still treated "Teleocrater" as if it wasn't described. Despite being undescribed, the 2008 study, too, did give a lot of detail (about half a page, as I recall), as well as some illustrations. How does something remain "undescribed" when there's that much detail? I'll take another look tomorrow, but I'm pretty sure the '08 study didn't mention a specific epithet (or I would definitely have mentioned it in the article), and it certainly didn't mention "Thecodontosaurus" alophos or alphos. Firsfron of Ronchester 05:22, 1 December 2009 (UTC)
An idea I wanted to run by you
- I'm glad you like the idea. I doubt Naish and the gang would get too involved, but where the two projects overlap, they may be willing to help. I'm gonna do some more brain storming, maybe a rough draft or two and then send the Dinolist a message. Abyssal (talk) 00:28, 3 December 2009 (UTC)
DYK for Stegomosuchus
On DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.
Materialscientist (talk) 11:44, 3 December 2009 (UTC)
Category:Cretaceous dinosaursHello J. Spencer, I have an advise about Category of Dinosaurs. At present, there are 56 articles in Category:Triassic dinosaurs, 245 articles in Category:Jurassic dinosaurs, and 617 articles in Category:Cretaceous dinosaurs.
However, Cretaceous is around 80 million years long, almost equaled to Late Triassic adding Jurassic. Besides, the Lower Cretaceous Dinosaurs group and Upper Cretaceous Dinosaurs group have obvious differences. My advise is that 「Category:Cretaceous dinosaurs」 can be divided into 「Category:Lower Cretaceous dinosaurs」 and 「Category:Upper Cretaceous dinosaurs」.
Also, I have a question about Dinosaurs in Pakistan. There seveal Dinosaurs found in Pakistan, such as:
Balochisaurus. My question is that whether Pakistan was a part of Indian-Madagascar in Cretaceous, or just a part of Asia continent. If Pakistan was a part of Indian-Madagascar, maybe the above articles should be moved into Category:Dinosaurs of India and Madagascar
hoseumou(talk) 13:59, 12 December 2009 (UTC)
Hadrosaur bipedality
- Fair enough, although I still think it shouldn't be included in the Jurassic Park article for two reasons: the work is unpublished; and perhaps more importantly, it's a bit unfair to call the JP people on it when it was perfectly legitimate to have bipedal running hadrosaurs in the 1990s. I think the page should stick to things that were known to be inaccurate or questionable at the time of production, like sizes and creative embellishments (intelligence, pretty much anything to do with Dilophosaurus, etc.). J. Spencer (talk) 04:39, 7 January 2010 (UTC)
Service awards proposal
Hello, J. Spencer/Archive 3! I noticed you display a service award, and would like to invite you to join the discussion over a proposed revamping of the awards.
If you have any opinions on the proposal, please participate in the discussion. Thanks! — the Man in Question (in question) 04:14, 8 January 2010 (UTC)
Kinkonychelys.
- Thank you very much! Oh no! It's not here!!! (talk) 08:00, 12 January 2010 (UTC)
- Hi again! Following your suggestions, I've gotten the page's main content up to 1227 characters, but of course, it still falls short of the DYK requirement by nearly 300 characters. The only information I can see in the paper about the genus that can still be included is the physical descriptions of the different specimens, and personal experience tells me I'm not too handy when it comes to understanding all of the scientific words used in these descriptions. I really want this article to become a DYK article, though, and I've already seen a few facts in what's been included that might "impress the judges" substantially for inclusion in a DYK update. If it's no trouble, and if any of that information is notable for inclusion in the article, could you please help with adding it in? That would be very much appreciated! Oh no! It's not here!!! (talk) 09:58, 12 January 2010 (UTC)
- Thanks again! Oh no! It's not here!!! (talk) 23:05, 12 January 2010 (UTC)
- Thanks a million, J. Spencer!!! Oh no! It's not here!!! (talk) 00:27, 13 January 2010 (UTC)
Talk:Dinosaur archiving
Deinonychus
- Thank you! I'm not actually very familiar with IPA, but people who are set up the templates on the dinosaur articles, and since this one's been stable for a long time, I figured it was probably a gag or a test edit. J. Spencer (talk) 00:50, 21 January 2010 (UTC)
- I cannot read IPA either - I merely "sounded it out", as you might phrase it. ;) -RadicalOne•Contact Me•Chase My Tail 02:44, 21 January 2010 (UTC)
WikiProject Dinosaurs in the Signpost
Redirects and categories
- Well, it doesn't really bother me either way; it just looked funny having it on a redirect. Species of Psittacosaurus
- I added comments o how to improve the article. GamerPro64 (talk) 01:59, 5 February 2010 (UTC)]
- I sorry to bother you but did you have me give suggestions to improve the article so you can improve the it or for someone else who would want to? GamerPro64 (talk) 23:18, 6 February 2010 (UTC).
- Thank you, J. Spencer!!! Oh no! It's not here!!! (talk) 23:39, 7 February 2010 (UTC)
Reply
Rhabdognathus.
- Okay then. Thank you for the links! Oh no! It's not here!!! (talk) 07:25, 2 March 2010 (UTC)
Linheraptor.
- Thanks! Oh no! It's not here!!! (talk) 02:31, 21 March 2010 (UTC)
Guanlong imageHello,
I've uploaded some images yesterday and put them with some articles.
You said that my images weren't the kind that you're looking for.
Is this one a bit better?
Guanlong wucaii Kind regards from 82.169.6.135 (talk) 13:45, 1 April 2010 (UTC) or better known as Joerim on the Dutch Wikipedia.
Welcome back
Re: Penghusuchus
Brachi and Giraffatitan
- I am torn between keeping a tidy list at the bottom and placing them at first use. I guess the latter is simply more common, and also easier to work with once the text doesn't change much anymore. However, writing the Plateosaurus article showed me that for a total re-write a list at the end would have been better - I spent lots of time searching through the editor. So I guess I'll keep the alphabetical list, and once the text is ready for the main page I'll place the citation at the first use. HMallison (talk) 06:08, 12 May 2010 (UTC)
You're quite right to prod me - however, I must point to the sauropoda re-write, which is devloping into a physiology of dinosaurs update.... I had some rough weeks, work and kids' health wise, but hope to contribute the missing data within the next few days. Then the text will need a thorough massage - was that you vounteering??? ;) HMallison (talk) 06:45, 15 June 2010 (UTC)
- Give me a day or two more, and I'll have a rough structure ready. Then we should talk about it - may or may not be best to use your structure. HMallison (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 15:57, 16 June 2010 (UTC).
If you're into sauropods....here's a must read for you :) Long, boring, but a "deal-breaker", 'cause it has all you ever need to know and cite (I hope).
http://www3.interscience.wiley.com/cgi-bin/fulltext/123397084/HTMLSTART
PDF here:
http://www3.interscience.wiley.com/cgi-bin/fulltext/123397084/PDFSTART
HMallison (talk) 23:35, 16 May 2010 (UTC)
- well, it took me three years to understand it all - but that did involve the research, too ;) Aachenosaurus
- Dunno. I've gone ahead and semi-protected for a month. We'll see if it deters this fellow or fellows. Only the pages listed at Wikipedia:Pending changes/Testing are to be flagged for pending changes. Firsfron of Ronchester 04:10, 9 July 2010 (UTC)
Family treeHi, I'm from the Dutch Wikipedia. Because I want an article to be finished tommorow (I'm going on holliday) I needed help from someone quikly, so I come to you. Maybe you still know me from the illustration of the Guanlong. Here's the problem:
<font color="white">unnamed
<font color="white">unnamed
<font color="white">unnamed
Champsosauridae
<font color="white">unnamed
familie Simoedosauridae
<font color="white">unnamed
?
Champsosauridae
I've got two family trees. The upper one is good, but in front of it there has to be "familie Simoedosauridae", like with the second one. Can you help me, please? Kind regards from 82.169.6.135 (talk) 19:48, 14 July 2010 (UTC) or Joerim, as I'm known at the Dutch Wikipedia.
- Thank you very much! Only one thing, what mistake did I make when making one of these family trees? Kind regards from 82.169.6.135 (talk) 07:35, 15 July 2010 (UTC) or Joerim
Talkback
Concavenator imageHi, I uploaded an image to Concavenator but it was removed due to it not being anatomically rigorous. I did a new one, which is here http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Conc2.png I used this image http://images.nationalgeographic.com/wpf/media-live/photos/000/257/cache/humpback-dinosaur-life-reconstruction_25710_600x450.jpg as a model, but I don't know if mine is yet fit to be used in the article. Any help on how are images judged would be very appreciated (I also posted all this on the article's talk page but I don't know if it will get much attention there).
thank you very much
Nestor db (talk) 18:44, 10 September 2010 (UTC)
Parks ref
-
Argentinosaurus againHello, I search for help about Argentinosaurus again. It seems that there are three papers about Argentinosaurus in 90s, such as:
- Appenzeller, T. 1994. Argentine dinos vie for heavyweight titles. Science 266, 1805.
- Paul, G.S. 1994. Is Garden Park home to the world’s largest known land animal? Garden Park Paleontology Society 4, 5.
- Paul, G.S. 1997. Dinosaur models: the good, the bad, and using them to estimate the mass of dinosaurs. In Wolberg, D.L., Stump, E. and Rosenberg, G.D. (eds), DinoFest International Proceedings, pp
But i can't find these papers in internet. Can you search these papers, and find out the length and weight of Argentinosaurus in these papers?
I'll be very thankful if you can help me, thanks. hoseumou 08:40, 28 March 2009 (UTC)
- Thanks you for your answer. But i have a question, it seems that [Early reconstructions estimated...] directly comes from Dinosaur Mailing List. Is that techniquely enough to be a reference? Finally, I have to say I very admired your dinosaur article, such as Edmontosaurus. :) hoseumou 07:43, 31 March 2009 (UTC)
QuinceratopsHi, Firs;
You'd better nail the article, too. J. Spencer (talk) 18:02, 24 May 2009 (UTC)
- Thanks J. The article was still redlinked when I removed it from Ceratopsidae. I'm not sure what to do about the image on Commons, File:Quinceratops 03869.JPG. Probably someone should be notified. Firsfron of Ronchester 18:15, 24 May 2009 (UTC)
- Moab man can probably be salvaged, given time (and a little TNT). Firsfron of Ronchester 19:33, 24 May 2009 (UTC)]
Piveteausaurus
RajasaurusHi! Spencer,
The following are quoated from Rjanag's talk page.
May I request you to please revisit the above article to review the tag, since another expert on the subject has edited it?--Nvvchar (talk) 09:46, 16 May 2009 (UTC)
- Hey Nvvchar, sorry it's taken me so long to get back. Anyway, it would probably be better to ask J. Spencer about this, since he's the one who did the rewriting and he's more familiar with the content. I'm sure that if he went through it it's probably all fine now, but I'd feel more comfortable letting him remove the tag (since he knows what the state of the article is, whereas all I can do right now is assume—and I'd rather not go through one sentence at a time, as JSpencer probably already has). rʨanaɢ talk/contribs 21:18, 30 May 2009 (UTC)
Since, as a well known expert in the field, you have edited the version of Rajasaurus after Rjanag,s tag, which was earlier also edited by a group of users of the
Dinosaurs Portal with extensive experience in this field, would you kindly consider removing the tag on the article? I am in the process of getting some pictures of Rajasuarus model erected in Lucknow India posted on the article. Thanks--Nvvchar (talk) 02:58, 31 May 2009 (UTC)]
- Thank you very much. I hope I will have opportunities in the near future on the ]
- Can you nominate this article for GA status since it is already assessed as "B" class and many of
Dinosaurs portal members like yourself and others have put in a lot of effort to improve it?--Nvvchar (talk) 15:37, 1 August 2009 (UTC)]
Heterodontosauridae
- I highly doubt that somebody would consider it OR, but it's better to be safe than sorry. Thanks for contacting the other editor, and hopefully a source can be found for it. --Happy editing! Nehrams2020 (talk • contrib) 05:04, 2 June 2009 (UTC)
Piveteau's brain probably was bigger than a walnut
- I think it's great. I think he was a scientific illustrator also; although many scientists at the time did their own illustrations, he was known for his. I tried to confirm this information to include in the article but found nothing specific. The illustrations can be included in both the dinosaur and bio articles, if you can get decent copies. If you don't get decent copies, and I have time, I can resketch at least the most important one of them if they're out of copyright. --69.226.103.13 (talk) 22:56, 2 June 2009 (UTC)
User 173.35.129.119 issues....I just undid a half dozen bad edits of his...again. He just got the temporary ban lifted and is right back at it..
it's gotten to where someone needs to get a perma ban put on that IP address. It's vandalism at this point. I don't know if you have that ability or can get in contact with someone who does, but it's really time. Forescore68 (talk) 16:15, 13 June 2009 (UTC)
- Oh, and thanks for cleaning up my Chuandongocoelurus mess...I did it in a huffy. Glad I don't lose points in this forum for being hasty and dumb...Forescore68 (talk) 02:33, 18 June 2009 (UTC)
Italictitle templateHi, Firs;
I just found out something useful about the italictitle template: I already knew that if it is put at the top, it prevents the uppermost [edit] bracket from showing. However, if it's put below the taxobox, as Bob did at Pteranodon and I just did with Allosaurus, it doesn't interfere. I don't know if this has editing drawbacks, but it's very good to know we can get back the edit bracket for the lede section, especially for ginormous articles. J. Spencer (talk) 01:35, 17 June 2009 (UTC)
- Hey!
- I didn't realize it prevents the uppermost edit link from showing. We might want to bring this up at tree of life. Either this should be fixed through the template itself, or I could possibly AWB it; I think there is a pretty easy way to delete the template name while substituting the same template name immediately below the taxobox. If this is acceptable to you (and everyone else who works in these areas), I could work on this tomorrow. Thanks for catching this. Firsfron of Ronchester 06:17, 17 June 2009 (UTC).
- P.S. Also, I'd like to make sure I interpreted everything I've included in the article correctly. Thanks in advance! Mess around with the guy in shades all you like - don't mess around with the girl in gloves! (talk) 08:28, 26 June 2009 (UTC)
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template. Mess around with the guy in shades all you like - don't mess around with the girl in gloves! (talk) 00:41, 27 June 2009 (UTC)
- I reveiewed the DYK hook for this, and everything looks fine except that I had some minor wording changes to the hook. If you are okay with those changes, please indicate so in its DYK submission at Template talk:Did You Know#Gallardosaurus and I can approve the hook. Rlendog (talk) 02:17, 8 July 2009 (UTC)]
New hoaxHi, Firs;
Here's a new one to nail, if it's still here by the time you read this: Rorasaurus. J. Spencer (talk) 13:19, 1 July 2009 (UTC)
(I'd watch Roarasaurus too, as they may try to recreate it.) J. Spencer (talk) 13:27, 1 July 2009 (UTC)
- Thanks. I've just nuked it. Firsfron of Ronchester 13:53, 1 July 2009 (UTC)
- Yeah, I'm going to start re-inquiring about the possibility of fixing WP:DABS. As you say, if some random IP hadn't added the name to the List, you wouldn't have noticed it. That's not good. Firsfron of Ronchester 00:47, 2 July 2009 (UTC)
- It's true: DABS was just one way of catching potential hoaxes (or very short new articles that editors sometimes create), but it was nice to have that option. Firsfron of Ronchester 04:32, 2 July 2009 (UTC)
- I had no idea it would be that easy. Request, and within an hour, voila! Firsfron of Ronchester 03:21, 13 July 2009 (UTC)
Thanks...
ITN for Australovenator, Diamantinasaurus and Wintonotitan
On In the news candidates page.
--BorgQueen (talk) 20:14, 4 July 2009 (UTC)
2009 hadrosaur chewing study
- I think with any article (media or not) there is a possibility of inaccuracies; that's why we check it with other sources, which is what I did in this Leonardo case. But I respect your opinion. I guess we'll just see where the AFD goes. — Hunter Kahn (c) 17:23, 5 July 2009 (UTC)
DYK for Gallardosaurus
On DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.
Wizardman 08:51, 10 July 2009 (UTC)
HerrerasaurusHey J,
After tomorrow, I am going on a 10-day wikibreak out of state, and may not have a ton of internet access. With the assistance of a lot of folks (including you... thanks, BTW) Herrerasaurus made it to FA, but there are still grammar adjustments that an editor wants to make. Can you take a look? I'm worried I won't be able to devote (much/any) time to genuine concerns over clarity. Firsfron of Ronchester 01:39, 30 July 2009 (UTC)
Carniadactylus.
Loch Ness Monster
- I think s/he’s almost figured out what was needed. Now, if only s/he could figure out how to enter citations fully … — SpikeToronto (talk) 17:21, 14 September 2009 (UTC)
- Well, it looks like it's taken care of, which goes on the positive side in my book. Thank you for the help! J. Spencer (talk) 03:09, 15 September 2009 (UTC)
Those hadrosaurs sure liked to eat, huh?
The Original Barnstar
For substantial additions to the Hadrosaur diet article, I salute you! Abyssal (talk) 03:55, 4 October 2009 (UTC)
Fruitadens
ITN for Fruitadens
On 22 October 2009, In the news was updated with a news item that involved the article Fruitadens, which you substantially updated. If you know of another interesting news item involving a recently created or updated article, then please suggest it on the candidates page.
--BorgQueen (talk) 16:32, 22 October 2009 (UTC)
RajasaurusHi!Spencer,
Congratulations for the GA upgarde of the artcile. Also thanks.--Nvvchar (talk) 18:34, 22 October 2009 (UTC)
Eld's DeerHi! Spencer,
Thanks for the message regarding
Eld's Deer was posted by me on DYK quite some months back and accepted. Since you are an expert in Fauna, will you please advice me if I should post it for GA upgrade. Thanks.--Nvvchar (talk) 02:04, 23 October 2009 (UTC)]
Re: Rajasaurus ga-rev
New find of Dinosaurs nestling ground in IndiaHi! Spencer,
A few days back I had read the above news item in several news papers in India. I have prepared a short write up on the same for any suitable insertion in the Portal or News item. Please see here
User:Nvvchar/sandbox/Ashokan Edicts (Delhi). You may kndly edit it suitably and if it has not appeared on the News page of WP you may consider posting it as a joint news item. Thanks.--Nvvchar (talk) 05:16, 28 October 2009 (UTC)]
Ceratonykus
ScienceDirectHi J,
Do you have access to ScienceDirect? I don't want to pay $31.50 for a paper which discusses "Teleocrater", especially when I don't know how detailed the portion on "Teleocrater" is. The cladogram from their analysis is viewable here, but that doesn't give me much to work with. I figured you being you, you might subscribe to their (rather expensive) service. If not, I'll just leave "Teleo" as he is for now. Firsfron of Ronchester 04:09, 12 November 2009 (UTC)
- Thanks J. As it turns out, a reference librarian I work with has access to the paper, so I now have it. Thanks again for offering. Take care, Firsfron of Ronchester 00:25, 13 November 2009 (UTC)
"Name"?
I know the scientific name should type in Name. But i see lots of scientific name in wikipedia were type in "Name". Why?
Is that official rules that Nomen nudum, Nomen oblitum, Nomen dubium should type in "Name"? or it is just a wikipedia rules? User:Devilfish1962 01:43, 26 Nov. 2009 (UTC)
96.239.237.62Hi, Firs;
I noticed you reverted
Bayosaurus". Having fixed a string of their edits this morning, I am 99% certain that this is the latest version of an editor who was recently blocked at 96.242.198.33 (talk · contribs) for inserting false dates, locations, and other information to paleo articles, and false episodes and voice actors to television shows. Something to keep an eye on, I suppose. J. Spencer (talk) 16:21, 28 November 2009 (UTC)]
- Hi J. Thanks. I wasn't aware of that. Something else to watch out for is this. Firsfron of Ronchester 17:07, 28 November 2009 (UTC)
ThescelosaurusHey J,
It looks like the Hungarian version of Thescelosaurus has become a FA! You're making a difference, even in languages you don't speak. :) (At least, I assume you don't speak Hungarian...) Firsfron of Ronchester 05:52, 30 November 2009 (UTC)
- That's a really weird discovery. I have the 2008 archosauriform histology study at work (I left it on my desk and I'm at home now), and they still treated "Teleocrater" as if it wasn't described. Despite being undescribed, the 2008 study, too, did give a lot of detail (about half a page, as I recall), as well as some illustrations. How does something remain "undescribed" when there's that much detail? I'll take another look tomorrow, but I'm pretty sure the '08 study didn't mention a specific epithet (or I would definitely have mentioned it in the article), and it certainly didn't mention "Thecodontosaurus" alophos or alphos. Firsfron of Ronchester 05:22, 1 December 2009 (UTC)
An idea I wanted to run by you
- I'm glad you like the idea. I doubt Naish and the gang would get too involved, but where the two projects overlap, they may be willing to help. I'm gonna do some more brain storming, maybe a rough draft or two and then send the Dinolist a message. Abyssal (talk) 00:28, 3 December 2009 (UTC)
DYK for Stegomosuchus
On DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.
Materialscientist (talk) 11:44, 3 December 2009 (UTC)
Category:Cretaceous dinosaursHello J. Spencer, I have an advise about Category of Dinosaurs. At present, there are 56 articles in Category:Triassic dinosaurs, 245 articles in Category:Jurassic dinosaurs, and 617 articles in Category:Cretaceous dinosaurs.
However, Cretaceous is around 80 million years long, almost equaled to Late Triassic adding Jurassic. Besides, the Lower Cretaceous Dinosaurs group and Upper Cretaceous Dinosaurs group have obvious differences. My advise is that 「Category:Cretaceous dinosaurs」 can be divided into 「Category:Lower Cretaceous dinosaurs」 and 「Category:Upper Cretaceous dinosaurs」.
Also, I have a question about Dinosaurs in Pakistan. There seveal Dinosaurs found in Pakistan, such as:
Balochisaurus. My question is that whether Pakistan was a part of Indian-Madagascar in Cretaceous, or just a part of Asia continent. If Pakistan was a part of Indian-Madagascar, maybe the above articles should be moved into Category:Dinosaurs of India and Madagascar
hoseumou(talk) 13:59, 12 December 2009 (UTC)
Hadrosaur bipedality
- Fair enough, although I still think it shouldn't be included in the Jurassic Park article for two reasons: the work is unpublished; and perhaps more importantly, it's a bit unfair to call the JP people on it when it was perfectly legitimate to have bipedal running hadrosaurs in the 1990s. I think the page should stick to things that were known to be inaccurate or questionable at the time of production, like sizes and creative embellishments (intelligence, pretty much anything to do with Dilophosaurus, etc.). J. Spencer (talk) 04:39, 7 January 2010 (UTC)
Service awards proposal
Hello, J. Spencer/Archive 3! I noticed you display a service award, and would like to invite you to join the discussion over a proposed revamping of the awards.
If you have any opinions on the proposal, please participate in the discussion. Thanks! — the Man in Question (in question) 04:14, 8 January 2010 (UTC)
Kinkonychelys.
- Thank you very much! Oh no! It's not here!!! (talk) 08:00, 12 January 2010 (UTC)
- Hi again! Following your suggestions, I've gotten the page's main content up to 1227 characters, but of course, it still falls short of the DYK requirement by nearly 300 characters. The only information I can see in the paper about the genus that can still be included is the physical descriptions of the different specimens, and personal experience tells me I'm not too handy when it comes to understanding all of the scientific words used in these descriptions. I really want this article to become a DYK article, though, and I've already seen a few facts in what's been included that might "impress the judges" substantially for inclusion in a DYK update. If it's no trouble, and if any of that information is notable for inclusion in the article, could you please help with adding it in? That would be very much appreciated! Oh no! It's not here!!! (talk) 09:58, 12 January 2010 (UTC)
- Thanks again! Oh no! It's not here!!! (talk) 23:05, 12 January 2010 (UTC)
- Thanks a million, J. Spencer!!! Oh no! It's not here!!! (talk) 00:27, 13 January 2010 (UTC)
Talk:Dinosaur archiving
Deinonychus
- Thank you! I'm not actually very familiar with IPA, but people who are set up the templates on the dinosaur articles, and since this one's been stable for a long time, I figured it was probably a gag or a test edit. J. Spencer (talk) 00:50, 21 January 2010 (UTC)
- I cannot read IPA either - I merely "sounded it out", as you might phrase it. ;) -RadicalOne•Contact Me•Chase My Tail 02:44, 21 January 2010 (UTC)
WikiProject Dinosaurs in the Signpost
Redirects and categories
- Well, it doesn't really bother me either way; it just looked funny having it on a redirect. Species of Psittacosaurus
- I added comments o how to improve the article. GamerPro64 (talk) 01:59, 5 February 2010 (UTC)]
- I sorry to bother you but did you have me give suggestions to improve the article so you can improve the it or for someone else who would want to? GamerPro64 (talk) 23:18, 6 February 2010 (UTC).
- Thank you, J. Spencer!!! Oh no! It's not here!!! (talk) 23:39, 7 February 2010 (UTC)
Reply
Rhabdognathus.
- Okay then. Thank you for the links! Oh no! It's not here!!! (talk) 07:25, 2 March 2010 (UTC)
Linheraptor.
- Thanks! Oh no! It's not here!!! (talk) 02:31, 21 March 2010 (UTC)
Guanlong imageHello,
I've uploaded some images yesterday and put them with some articles.
You said that my images weren't the kind that you're looking for.
Is this one a bit better?
Guanlong wucaii Kind regards from 82.169.6.135 (talk) 13:45, 1 April 2010 (UTC) or better known as Joerim on the Dutch Wikipedia.
Welcome back
Re: Penghusuchus
Brachi and Giraffatitan
- I am torn between keeping a tidy list at the bottom and placing them at first use. I guess the latter is simply more common, and also easier to work with once the text doesn't change much anymore. However, writing the Plateosaurus article showed me that for a total re-write a list at the end would have been better - I spent lots of time searching through the editor. So I guess I'll keep the alphabetical list, and once the text is ready for the main page I'll place the citation at the first use. HMallison (talk) 06:08, 12 May 2010 (UTC)
You're quite right to prod me - however, I must point to the sauropoda re-write, which is devloping into a physiology of dinosaurs update.... I had some rough weeks, work and kids' health wise, but hope to contribute the missing data within the next few days. Then the text will need a thorough massage - was that you vounteering??? ;) HMallison (talk) 06:45, 15 June 2010 (UTC)
- Give me a day or two more, and I'll have a rough structure ready. Then we should talk about it - may or may not be best to use your structure. HMallison (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 15:57, 16 June 2010 (UTC).
If you're into sauropods....here's a must read for you :) Long, boring, but a "deal-breaker", 'cause it has all you ever need to know and cite (I hope).
http://www3.interscience.wiley.com/cgi-bin/fulltext/123397084/HTMLSTART
PDF here:
http://www3.interscience.wiley.com/cgi-bin/fulltext/123397084/PDFSTART
HMallison (talk) 23:35, 16 May 2010 (UTC)
- well, it took me three years to understand it all - but that did involve the research, too ;) Aachenosaurus
- Dunno. I've gone ahead and semi-protected for a month. We'll see if it deters this fellow or fellows. Only the pages listed at Wikipedia:Pending changes/Testing are to be flagged for pending changes. Firsfron of Ronchester 04:10, 9 July 2010 (UTC)
Family treeHi, I'm from the Dutch Wikipedia. Because I want an article to be finished tommorow (I'm going on holliday) I needed help from someone quikly, so I come to you. Maybe you still know me from the illustration of the Guanlong. Here's the problem:
<font color="white">unnamed
<font color="white">unnamed
<font color="white">unnamed
Champsosauridae
<font color="white">unnamed
familie Simoedosauridae
<font color="white">unnamed
?
Champsosauridae
I've got two family trees. The upper one is good, but in front of it there has to be "familie Simoedosauridae", like with the second one. Can you help me, please? Kind regards from 82.169.6.135 (talk) 19:48, 14 July 2010 (UTC) or Joerim, as I'm known at the Dutch Wikipedia.
- Thank you very much! Only one thing, what mistake did I make when making one of these family trees? Kind regards from 82.169.6.135 (talk) 07:35, 15 July 2010 (UTC) or Joerim
Talkback
Concavenator imageHi, I uploaded an image to Concavenator but it was removed due to it not being anatomically rigorous. I did a new one, which is here http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Conc2.png I used this image http://images.nationalgeographic.com/wpf/media-live/photos/000/257/cache/humpback-dinosaur-life-reconstruction_25710_600x450.jpg as a model, but I don't know if mine is yet fit to be used in the article. Any help on how are images judged would be very appreciated (I also posted all this on the article's talk page but I don't know if it will get much attention there).
thank you very much
Nestor db (talk) 18:44, 10 September 2010 (UTC)
Parks ref
-
QuinceratopsHi, Firs;
You'd better nail the article, too. J. Spencer (talk) 18:02, 24 May 2009 (UTC)
- Thanks J. The article was still redlinked when I removed it from Ceratopsidae. I'm not sure what to do about the image on Commons, File:Quinceratops 03869.JPG. Probably someone should be notified. Firsfron of Ronchester 18:15, 24 May 2009 (UTC)
- Moab man can probably be salvaged, given time (and a little TNT). Firsfron of Ronchester 19:33, 24 May 2009 (UTC)]
Piveteausaurus
RajasaurusHi! Spencer,
The following are quoated from Rjanag's talk page.
May I request you to please revisit the above article to review the tag, since another expert on the subject has edited it?--Nvvchar (talk) 09:46, 16 May 2009 (UTC)
- Hey Nvvchar, sorry it's taken me so long to get back. Anyway, it would probably be better to ask J. Spencer about this, since he's the one who did the rewriting and he's more familiar with the content. I'm sure that if he went through it it's probably all fine now, but I'd feel more comfortable letting him remove the tag (since he knows what the state of the article is, whereas all I can do right now is assume—and I'd rather not go through one sentence at a time, as JSpencer probably already has). rʨanaɢ talk/contribs 21:18, 30 May 2009 (UTC)
Since, as a well known expert in the field, you have edited the version of Rajasaurus after Rjanag,s tag, which was earlier also edited by a group of users of the
Dinosaurs Portal with extensive experience in this field, would you kindly consider removing the tag on the article? I am in the process of getting some pictures of Rajasuarus model erected in Lucknow India posted on the article. Thanks--Nvvchar (talk) 02:58, 31 May 2009 (UTC)]
- Thank you very much. I hope I will have opportunities in the near future on the ]
- Can you nominate this article for GA status since it is already assessed as "B" class and many of
Dinosaurs portal members like yourself and others have put in a lot of effort to improve it?--Nvvchar (talk) 15:37, 1 August 2009 (UTC)]
Heterodontosauridae
- I highly doubt that somebody would consider it OR, but it's better to be safe than sorry. Thanks for contacting the other editor, and hopefully a source can be found for it. --Happy editing! Nehrams2020 (talk • contrib) 05:04, 2 June 2009 (UTC)
Piveteau's brain probably was bigger than a walnut
- I think it's great. I think he was a scientific illustrator also; although many scientists at the time did their own illustrations, he was known for his. I tried to confirm this information to include in the article but found nothing specific. The illustrations can be included in both the dinosaur and bio articles, if you can get decent copies. If you don't get decent copies, and I have time, I can resketch at least the most important one of them if they're out of copyright. --69.226.103.13 (talk) 22:56, 2 June 2009 (UTC)
User 173.35.129.119 issues....I just undid a half dozen bad edits of his...again. He just got the temporary ban lifted and is right back at it..
it's gotten to where someone needs to get a perma ban put on that IP address. It's vandalism at this point. I don't know if you have that ability or can get in contact with someone who does, but it's really time. Forescore68 (talk) 16:15, 13 June 2009 (UTC)
- Oh, and thanks for cleaning up my Chuandongocoelurus mess...I did it in a huffy. Glad I don't lose points in this forum for being hasty and dumb...Forescore68 (talk) 02:33, 18 June 2009 (UTC)
Italictitle templateHi, Firs;
I just found out something useful about the italictitle template: I already knew that if it is put at the top, it prevents the uppermost [edit] bracket from showing. However, if it's put below the taxobox, as Bob did at Pteranodon and I just did with Allosaurus, it doesn't interfere. I don't know if this has editing drawbacks, but it's very good to know we can get back the edit bracket for the lede section, especially for ginormous articles. J. Spencer (talk) 01:35, 17 June 2009 (UTC)
- Hey!
- I didn't realize it prevents the uppermost edit link from showing. We might want to bring this up at tree of life. Either this should be fixed through the template itself, or I could possibly AWB it; I think there is a pretty easy way to delete the template name while substituting the same template name immediately below the taxobox. If this is acceptable to you (and everyone else who works in these areas), I could work on this tomorrow. Thanks for catching this. Firsfron of Ronchester 06:17, 17 June 2009 (UTC).
- P.S. Also, I'd like to make sure I interpreted everything I've included in the article correctly. Thanks in advance! Mess around with the guy in shades all you like - don't mess around with the girl in gloves! (talk) 08:28, 26 June 2009 (UTC)
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template. Mess around with the guy in shades all you like - don't mess around with the girl in gloves! (talk) 00:41, 27 June 2009 (UTC)
- I reveiewed the DYK hook for this, and everything looks fine except that I had some minor wording changes to the hook. If you are okay with those changes, please indicate so in its DYK submission at Template talk:Did You Know#Gallardosaurus and I can approve the hook. Rlendog (talk) 02:17, 8 July 2009 (UTC)]
New hoaxHi, Firs;
Here's a new one to nail, if it's still here by the time you read this: Rorasaurus. J. Spencer (talk) 13:19, 1 July 2009 (UTC)
(I'd watch Roarasaurus too, as they may try to recreate it.) J. Spencer (talk) 13:27, 1 July 2009 (UTC)
- Thanks. I've just nuked it. Firsfron of Ronchester 13:53, 1 July 2009 (UTC)
- Yeah, I'm going to start re-inquiring about the possibility of fixing WP:DABS. As you say, if some random IP hadn't added the name to the List, you wouldn't have noticed it. That's not good. Firsfron of Ronchester 00:47, 2 July 2009 (UTC)
- It's true: DABS was just one way of catching potential hoaxes (or very short new articles that editors sometimes create), but it was nice to have that option. Firsfron of Ronchester 04:32, 2 July 2009 (UTC)
- I had no idea it would be that easy. Request, and within an hour, voila! Firsfron of Ronchester 03:21, 13 July 2009 (UTC)
Thanks...
ITN for Australovenator, Diamantinasaurus and Wintonotitan
On In the news candidates page.
--BorgQueen (talk) 20:14, 4 July 2009 (UTC)
2009 hadrosaur chewing study
- I think with any article (media or not) there is a possibility of inaccuracies; that's why we check it with other sources, which is what I did in this Leonardo case. But I respect your opinion. I guess we'll just see where the AFD goes. — Hunter Kahn (c) 17:23, 5 July 2009 (UTC)
DYK for Gallardosaurus
On DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.
Wizardman 08:51, 10 July 2009 (UTC)
HerrerasaurusHey J,
After tomorrow, I am going on a 10-day wikibreak out of state, and may not have a ton of internet access. With the assistance of a lot of folks (including you... thanks, BTW) Herrerasaurus made it to FA, but there are still grammar adjustments that an editor wants to make. Can you take a look? I'm worried I won't be able to devote (much/any) time to genuine concerns over clarity. Firsfron of Ronchester 01:39, 30 July 2009 (UTC)
Carniadactylus.
Loch Ness Monster
- I think s/he’s almost figured out what was needed. Now, if only s/he could figure out how to enter citations fully … — SpikeToronto (talk) 17:21, 14 September 2009 (UTC)
- Well, it looks like it's taken care of, which goes on the positive side in my book. Thank you for the help! J. Spencer (talk) 03:09, 15 September 2009 (UTC)
Those hadrosaurs sure liked to eat, huh?
The Original Barnstar
For substantial additions to the Hadrosaur diet article, I salute you! Abyssal (talk) 03:55, 4 October 2009 (UTC)
Fruitadens
ITN for Fruitadens
On 22 October 2009, In the news was updated with a news item that involved the article Fruitadens, which you substantially updated. If you know of another interesting news item involving a recently created or updated article, then please suggest it on the candidates page.
--BorgQueen (talk) 16:32, 22 October 2009 (UTC)
RajasaurusHi!Spencer,
Congratulations for the GA upgarde of the artcile. Also thanks.--Nvvchar (talk) 18:34, 22 October 2009 (UTC)
Eld's DeerHi! Spencer,
Thanks for the message regarding
Eld's Deer was posted by me on DYK quite some months back and accepted. Since you are an expert in Fauna, will you please advice me if I should post it for GA upgrade. Thanks.--Nvvchar (talk) 02:04, 23 October 2009 (UTC)]
Re: Rajasaurus ga-rev
New find of Dinosaurs nestling ground in IndiaHi! Spencer,
A few days back I had read the above news item in several news papers in India. I have prepared a short write up on the same for any suitable insertion in the Portal or News item. Please see here
User:Nvvchar/sandbox/Ashokan Edicts (Delhi). You may kndly edit it suitably and if it has not appeared on the News page of WP you may consider posting it as a joint news item. Thanks.--Nvvchar (talk) 05:16, 28 October 2009 (UTC)]
Ceratonykus
ScienceDirectHi J,
Do you have access to ScienceDirect? I don't want to pay $31.50 for a paper which discusses "Teleocrater", especially when I don't know how detailed the portion on "Teleocrater" is. The cladogram from their analysis is viewable here, but that doesn't give me much to work with. I figured you being you, you might subscribe to their (rather expensive) service. If not, I'll just leave "Teleo" as he is for now. Firsfron of Ronchester 04:09, 12 November 2009 (UTC)
- Thanks J. As it turns out, a reference librarian I work with has access to the paper, so I now have it. Thanks again for offering. Take care, Firsfron of Ronchester 00:25, 13 November 2009 (UTC)
"Name"?
I know the scientific name should type in Name. But i see lots of scientific name in wikipedia were type in "Name". Why?
Is that official rules that Nomen nudum, Nomen oblitum, Nomen dubium should type in "Name"? or it is just a wikipedia rules? User:Devilfish1962 01:43, 26 Nov. 2009 (UTC)
96.239.237.62Hi, Firs;
I noticed you reverted
Bayosaurus". Having fixed a string of their edits this morning, I am 99% certain that this is the latest version of an editor who was recently blocked at 96.242.198.33 (talk · contribs) for inserting false dates, locations, and other information to paleo articles, and false episodes and voice actors to television shows. Something to keep an eye on, I suppose. J. Spencer (talk) 16:21, 28 November 2009 (UTC)]
- Hi J. Thanks. I wasn't aware of that. Something else to watch out for is this. Firsfron of Ronchester 17:07, 28 November 2009 (UTC)
ThescelosaurusHey J,
It looks like the Hungarian version of Thescelosaurus has become a FA! You're making a difference, even in languages you don't speak. :) (At least, I assume you don't speak Hungarian...) Firsfron of Ronchester 05:52, 30 November 2009 (UTC)
- That's a really weird discovery. I have the 2008 archosauriform histology study at work (I left it on my desk and I'm at home now), and they still treated "Teleocrater" as if it wasn't described. Despite being undescribed, the 2008 study, too, did give a lot of detail (about half a page, as I recall), as well as some illustrations. How does something remain "undescribed" when there's that much detail? I'll take another look tomorrow, but I'm pretty sure the '08 study didn't mention a specific epithet (or I would definitely have mentioned it in the article), and it certainly didn't mention "Thecodontosaurus" alophos or alphos. Firsfron of Ronchester 05:22, 1 December 2009 (UTC)
An idea I wanted to run by you
- I'm glad you like the idea. I doubt Naish and the gang would get too involved, but where the two projects overlap, they may be willing to help. I'm gonna do some more brain storming, maybe a rough draft or two and then send the Dinolist a message. Abyssal (talk) 00:28, 3 December 2009 (UTC)
DYK for Stegomosuchus
On DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.
Materialscientist (talk) 11:44, 3 December 2009 (UTC)
Category:Cretaceous dinosaursHello J. Spencer, I have an advise about Category of Dinosaurs. At present, there are 56 articles in Category:Triassic dinosaurs, 245 articles in Category:Jurassic dinosaurs, and 617 articles in Category:Cretaceous dinosaurs.
However, Cretaceous is around 80 million years long, almost equaled to Late Triassic adding Jurassic. Besides, the Lower Cretaceous Dinosaurs group and Upper Cretaceous Dinosaurs group have obvious differences. My advise is that 「Category:Cretaceous dinosaurs」 can be divided into 「Category:Lower Cretaceous dinosaurs」 and 「Category:Upper Cretaceous dinosaurs」.
Also, I have a question about Dinosaurs in Pakistan. There seveal Dinosaurs found in Pakistan, such as:
Balochisaurus. My question is that whether Pakistan was a part of Indian-Madagascar in Cretaceous, or just a part of Asia continent. If Pakistan was a part of Indian-Madagascar, maybe the above articles should be moved into Category:Dinosaurs of India and Madagascar
hoseumou(talk) 13:59, 12 December 2009 (UTC)
Hadrosaur bipedality
- Fair enough, although I still think it shouldn't be included in the Jurassic Park article for two reasons: the work is unpublished; and perhaps more importantly, it's a bit unfair to call the JP people on it when it was perfectly legitimate to have bipedal running hadrosaurs in the 1990s. I think the page should stick to things that were known to be inaccurate or questionable at the time of production, like sizes and creative embellishments (intelligence, pretty much anything to do with Dilophosaurus, etc.). J. Spencer (talk) 04:39, 7 January 2010 (UTC)
Service awards proposal
Hello, J. Spencer/Archive 3! I noticed you display a service award, and would like to invite you to join the discussion over a proposed revamping of the awards.
If you have any opinions on the proposal, please participate in the discussion. Thanks! — the Man in Question (in question) 04:14, 8 January 2010 (UTC)
Kinkonychelys.
- Thank you very much! Oh no! It's not here!!! (talk) 08:00, 12 January 2010 (UTC)
- Hi again! Following your suggestions, I've gotten the page's main content up to 1227 characters, but of course, it still falls short of the DYK requirement by nearly 300 characters. The only information I can see in the paper about the genus that can still be included is the physical descriptions of the different specimens, and personal experience tells me I'm not too handy when it comes to understanding all of the scientific words used in these descriptions. I really want this article to become a DYK article, though, and I've already seen a few facts in what's been included that might "impress the judges" substantially for inclusion in a DYK update. If it's no trouble, and if any of that information is notable for inclusion in the article, could you please help with adding it in? That would be very much appreciated! Oh no! It's not here!!! (talk) 09:58, 12 January 2010 (UTC)
- Thanks again! Oh no! It's not here!!! (talk) 23:05, 12 January 2010 (UTC)
- Thanks a million, J. Spencer!!! Oh no! It's not here!!! (talk) 00:27, 13 January 2010 (UTC)
Talk:Dinosaur archiving
Deinonychus
- Thank you! I'm not actually very familiar with IPA, but people who are set up the templates on the dinosaur articles, and since this one's been stable for a long time, I figured it was probably a gag or a test edit. J. Spencer (talk) 00:50, 21 January 2010 (UTC)
- I cannot read IPA either - I merely "sounded it out", as you might phrase it. ;) -RadicalOne•Contact Me•Chase My Tail 02:44, 21 January 2010 (UTC)
WikiProject Dinosaurs in the Signpost
Redirects and categories
- Well, it doesn't really bother me either way; it just looked funny having it on a redirect. Species of Psittacosaurus
- I added comments o how to improve the article. GamerPro64 (talk) 01:59, 5 February 2010 (UTC)]
- I sorry to bother you but did you have me give suggestions to improve the article so you can improve the it or for someone else who would want to? GamerPro64 (talk) 23:18, 6 February 2010 (UTC).
- Thank you, J. Spencer!!! Oh no! It's not here!!! (talk) 23:39, 7 February 2010 (UTC)
Reply
Rhabdognathus.
- Okay then. Thank you for the links! Oh no! It's not here!!! (talk) 07:25, 2 March 2010 (UTC)
Linheraptor.
- Thanks! Oh no! It's not here!!! (talk) 02:31, 21 March 2010 (UTC)
Guanlong imageHello,
I've uploaded some images yesterday and put them with some articles.
You said that my images weren't the kind that you're looking for.
Is this one a bit better?
Guanlong wucaii Kind regards from 82.169.6.135 (talk) 13:45, 1 April 2010 (UTC) or better known as Joerim on the Dutch Wikipedia.
Welcome back
Re: Penghusuchus
Brachi and Giraffatitan
- I am torn between keeping a tidy list at the bottom and placing them at first use. I guess the latter is simply more common, and also easier to work with once the text doesn't change much anymore. However, writing the Plateosaurus article showed me that for a total re-write a list at the end would have been better - I spent lots of time searching through the editor. So I guess I'll keep the alphabetical list, and once the text is ready for the main page I'll place the citation at the first use. HMallison (talk) 06:08, 12 May 2010 (UTC)
You're quite right to prod me - however, I must point to the sauropoda re-write, which is devloping into a physiology of dinosaurs update.... I had some rough weeks, work and kids' health wise, but hope to contribute the missing data within the next few days. Then the text will need a thorough massage - was that you vounteering??? ;) HMallison (talk) 06:45, 15 June 2010 (UTC)
- Give me a day or two more, and I'll have a rough structure ready. Then we should talk about it - may or may not be best to use your structure. HMallison (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 15:57, 16 June 2010 (UTC).
If you're into sauropods....here's a must read for you :) Long, boring, but a "deal-breaker", 'cause it has all you ever need to know and cite (I hope).
http://www3.interscience.wiley.com/cgi-bin/fulltext/123397084/HTMLSTART
PDF here:
http://www3.interscience.wiley.com/cgi-bin/fulltext/123397084/PDFSTART
HMallison (talk) 23:35, 16 May 2010 (UTC)
- well, it took me three years to understand it all - but that did involve the research, too ;) Aachenosaurus
- Dunno. I've gone ahead and semi-protected for a month. We'll see if it deters this fellow or fellows. Only the pages listed at Wikipedia:Pending changes/Testing are to be flagged for pending changes. Firsfron of Ronchester 04:10, 9 July 2010 (UTC)
Family treeHi, I'm from the Dutch Wikipedia. Because I want an article to be finished tommorow (I'm going on holliday) I needed help from someone quikly, so I come to you. Maybe you still know me from the illustration of the Guanlong. Here's the problem:
<font color="white">unnamed
<font color="white">unnamed
<font color="white">unnamed
Champsosauridae
<font color="white">unnamed
familie Simoedosauridae
<font color="white">unnamed
?
Champsosauridae
I've got two family trees. The upper one is good, but in front of it there has to be "familie Simoedosauridae", like with the second one. Can you help me, please? Kind regards from 82.169.6.135 (talk) 19:48, 14 July 2010 (UTC) or Joerim, as I'm known at the Dutch Wikipedia.
- Thank you very much! Only one thing, what mistake did I make when making one of these family trees? Kind regards from 82.169.6.135 (talk) 07:35, 15 July 2010 (UTC) or Joerim
Talkback
Concavenator imageHi, I uploaded an image to Concavenator but it was removed due to it not being anatomically rigorous. I did a new one, which is here http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Conc2.png I used this image http://images.nationalgeographic.com/wpf/media-live/photos/000/257/cache/humpback-dinosaur-life-reconstruction_25710_600x450.jpg as a model, but I don't know if mine is yet fit to be used in the article. Any help on how are images judged would be very appreciated (I also posted all this on the article's talk page but I don't know if it will get much attention there).
thank you very much
Nestor db (talk) 18:44, 10 September 2010 (UTC)
Parks ref
-
RajasaurusHi! Spencer,
The following are quoated from Rjanag's talk page.
May I request you to please revisit the above article to review the tag, since another expert on the subject has edited it?--Nvvchar (talk) 09:46, 16 May 2009 (UTC)
- Hey Nvvchar, sorry it's taken me so long to get back. Anyway, it would probably be better to ask J. Spencer about this, since he's the one who did the rewriting and he's more familiar with the content. I'm sure that if he went through it it's probably all fine now, but I'd feel more comfortable letting him remove the tag (since he knows what the state of the article is, whereas all I can do right now is assume—and I'd rather not go through one sentence at a time, as JSpencer probably already has). rʨanaɢ talk/contribs 21:18, 30 May 2009 (UTC)
Since, as a well known expert in the field, you have edited the version of Rajasaurus after Rjanag,s tag, which was earlier also edited by a group of users of the
Dinosaurs Portal with extensive experience in this field, would you kindly consider removing the tag on the article? I am in the process of getting some pictures of Rajasuarus model erected in Lucknow India posted on the article. Thanks--Nvvchar (talk) 02:58, 31 May 2009 (UTC)]
- Thank you very much. I hope I will have opportunities in the near future on the ]
- Can you nominate this article for GA status since it is already assessed as "B" class and many of
Dinosaurs portal members like yourself and others have put in a lot of effort to improve it?--Nvvchar (talk) 15:37, 1 August 2009 (UTC)]
Heterodontosauridae
- I highly doubt that somebody would consider it OR, but it's better to be safe than sorry. Thanks for contacting the other editor, and hopefully a source can be found for it. --Happy editing! Nehrams2020 (talk • contrib) 05:04, 2 June 2009 (UTC)
Piveteau's brain probably was bigger than a walnut
- I think it's great. I think he was a scientific illustrator also; although many scientists at the time did their own illustrations, he was known for his. I tried to confirm this information to include in the article but found nothing specific. The illustrations can be included in both the dinosaur and bio articles, if you can get decent copies. If you don't get decent copies, and I have time, I can resketch at least the most important one of them if they're out of copyright. --69.226.103.13 (talk) 22:56, 2 June 2009 (UTC)
User 173.35.129.119 issues....I just undid a half dozen bad edits of his...again. He just got the temporary ban lifted and is right back at it..
it's gotten to where someone needs to get a perma ban put on that IP address. It's vandalism at this point. I don't know if you have that ability or can get in contact with someone who does, but it's really time. Forescore68 (talk) 16:15, 13 June 2009 (UTC)
- Oh, and thanks for cleaning up my Chuandongocoelurus mess...I did it in a huffy. Glad I don't lose points in this forum for being hasty and dumb...Forescore68 (talk) 02:33, 18 June 2009 (UTC)
Italictitle templateHi, Firs;
I just found out something useful about the italictitle template: I already knew that if it is put at the top, it prevents the uppermost [edit] bracket from showing. However, if it's put below the taxobox, as Bob did at Pteranodon and I just did with Allosaurus, it doesn't interfere. I don't know if this has editing drawbacks, but it's very good to know we can get back the edit bracket for the lede section, especially for ginormous articles. J. Spencer (talk) 01:35, 17 June 2009 (UTC)
- Hey!
- I didn't realize it prevents the uppermost edit link from showing. We might want to bring this up at tree of life. Either this should be fixed through the template itself, or I could possibly AWB it; I think there is a pretty easy way to delete the template name while substituting the same template name immediately below the taxobox. If this is acceptable to you (and everyone else who works in these areas), I could work on this tomorrow. Thanks for catching this. Firsfron of Ronchester 06:17, 17 June 2009 (UTC).
- P.S. Also, I'd like to make sure I interpreted everything I've included in the article correctly. Thanks in advance! Mess around with the guy in shades all you like - don't mess around with the girl in gloves! (talk) 08:28, 26 June 2009 (UTC)
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template. Mess around with the guy in shades all you like - don't mess around with the girl in gloves! (talk) 00:41, 27 June 2009 (UTC)
- I reveiewed the DYK hook for this, and everything looks fine except that I had some minor wording changes to the hook. If you are okay with those changes, please indicate so in its DYK submission at Template talk:Did You Know#Gallardosaurus and I can approve the hook. Rlendog (talk) 02:17, 8 July 2009 (UTC)]
New hoaxHi, Firs;
Here's a new one to nail, if it's still here by the time you read this: Rorasaurus. J. Spencer (talk) 13:19, 1 July 2009 (UTC)
(I'd watch Roarasaurus too, as they may try to recreate it.) J. Spencer (talk) 13:27, 1 July 2009 (UTC)
- Thanks. I've just nuked it. Firsfron of Ronchester 13:53, 1 July 2009 (UTC)
- Yeah, I'm going to start re-inquiring about the possibility of fixing WP:DABS. As you say, if some random IP hadn't added the name to the List, you wouldn't have noticed it. That's not good. Firsfron of Ronchester 00:47, 2 July 2009 (UTC)
- It's true: DABS was just one way of catching potential hoaxes (or very short new articles that editors sometimes create), but it was nice to have that option. Firsfron of Ronchester 04:32, 2 July 2009 (UTC)
- I had no idea it would be that easy. Request, and within an hour, voila! Firsfron of Ronchester 03:21, 13 July 2009 (UTC)
Thanks...
ITN for Australovenator, Diamantinasaurus and Wintonotitan
On In the news candidates page.
--BorgQueen (talk) 20:14, 4 July 2009 (UTC)
2009 hadrosaur chewing study
- I think with any article (media or not) there is a possibility of inaccuracies; that's why we check it with other sources, which is what I did in this Leonardo case. But I respect your opinion. I guess we'll just see where the AFD goes. — Hunter Kahn (c) 17:23, 5 July 2009 (UTC)
DYK for Gallardosaurus
On DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.
Wizardman 08:51, 10 July 2009 (UTC)
HerrerasaurusHey J,
After tomorrow, I am going on a 10-day wikibreak out of state, and may not have a ton of internet access. With the assistance of a lot of folks (including you... thanks, BTW) Herrerasaurus made it to FA, but there are still grammar adjustments that an editor wants to make. Can you take a look? I'm worried I won't be able to devote (much/any) time to genuine concerns over clarity. Firsfron of Ronchester 01:39, 30 July 2009 (UTC)
Carniadactylus.
Loch Ness Monster
- I think s/he’s almost figured out what was needed. Now, if only s/he could figure out how to enter citations fully … — SpikeToronto (talk) 17:21, 14 September 2009 (UTC)
- Well, it looks like it's taken care of, which goes on the positive side in my book. Thank you for the help! J. Spencer (talk) 03:09, 15 September 2009 (UTC)
Those hadrosaurs sure liked to eat, huh?
The Original Barnstar
For substantial additions to the Hadrosaur diet article, I salute you! Abyssal (talk) 03:55, 4 October 2009 (UTC)
Fruitadens
ITN for Fruitadens
On 22 October 2009, In the news was updated with a news item that involved the article Fruitadens, which you substantially updated. If you know of another interesting news item involving a recently created or updated article, then please suggest it on the candidates page.
--BorgQueen (talk) 16:32, 22 October 2009 (UTC)
RajasaurusHi!Spencer,
Congratulations for the GA upgarde of the artcile. Also thanks.--Nvvchar (talk) 18:34, 22 October 2009 (UTC)
Eld's DeerHi! Spencer,
Thanks for the message regarding
Eld's Deer was posted by me on DYK quite some months back and accepted. Since you are an expert in Fauna, will you please advice me if I should post it for GA upgrade. Thanks.--Nvvchar (talk) 02:04, 23 October 2009 (UTC)]
Re: Rajasaurus ga-rev
New find of Dinosaurs nestling ground in IndiaHi! Spencer,
A few days back I had read the above news item in several news papers in India. I have prepared a short write up on the same for any suitable insertion in the Portal or News item. Please see here
User:Nvvchar/sandbox/Ashokan Edicts (Delhi). You may kndly edit it suitably and if it has not appeared on the News page of WP you may consider posting it as a joint news item. Thanks.--Nvvchar (talk) 05:16, 28 October 2009 (UTC)]
Ceratonykus
ScienceDirectHi J,
Do you have access to ScienceDirect? I don't want to pay $31.50 for a paper which discusses "Teleocrater", especially when I don't know how detailed the portion on "Teleocrater" is. The cladogram from their analysis is viewable here, but that doesn't give me much to work with. I figured you being you, you might subscribe to their (rather expensive) service. If not, I'll just leave "Teleo" as he is for now. Firsfron of Ronchester 04:09, 12 November 2009 (UTC)
- Thanks J. As it turns out, a reference librarian I work with has access to the paper, so I now have it. Thanks again for offering. Take care, Firsfron of Ronchester 00:25, 13 November 2009 (UTC)
"Name"?
I know the scientific name should type in Name. But i see lots of scientific name in wikipedia were type in "Name". Why?
Is that official rules that Nomen nudum, Nomen oblitum, Nomen dubium should type in "Name"? or it is just a wikipedia rules? User:Devilfish1962 01:43, 26 Nov. 2009 (UTC)
96.239.237.62Hi, Firs;
I noticed you reverted
Bayosaurus". Having fixed a string of their edits this morning, I am 99% certain that this is the latest version of an editor who was recently blocked at 96.242.198.33 (talk · contribs) for inserting false dates, locations, and other information to paleo articles, and false episodes and voice actors to television shows. Something to keep an eye on, I suppose. J. Spencer (talk) 16:21, 28 November 2009 (UTC)]
- Hi J. Thanks. I wasn't aware of that. Something else to watch out for is this. Firsfron of Ronchester 17:07, 28 November 2009 (UTC)
ThescelosaurusHey J,
It looks like the Hungarian version of Thescelosaurus has become a FA! You're making a difference, even in languages you don't speak. :) (At least, I assume you don't speak Hungarian...) Firsfron of Ronchester 05:52, 30 November 2009 (UTC)
- That's a really weird discovery. I have the 2008 archosauriform histology study at work (I left it on my desk and I'm at home now), and they still treated "Teleocrater" as if it wasn't described. Despite being undescribed, the 2008 study, too, did give a lot of detail (about half a page, as I recall), as well as some illustrations. How does something remain "undescribed" when there's that much detail? I'll take another look tomorrow, but I'm pretty sure the '08 study didn't mention a specific epithet (or I would definitely have mentioned it in the article), and it certainly didn't mention "Thecodontosaurus" alophos or alphos. Firsfron of Ronchester 05:22, 1 December 2009 (UTC)
An idea I wanted to run by you
- I'm glad you like the idea. I doubt Naish and the gang would get too involved, but where the two projects overlap, they may be willing to help. I'm gonna do some more brain storming, maybe a rough draft or two and then send the Dinolist a message. Abyssal (talk) 00:28, 3 December 2009 (UTC)
DYK for Stegomosuchus
On DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.
Materialscientist (talk) 11:44, 3 December 2009 (UTC)
Category:Cretaceous dinosaursHello J. Spencer, I have an advise about Category of Dinosaurs. At present, there are 56 articles in Category:Triassic dinosaurs, 245 articles in Category:Jurassic dinosaurs, and 617 articles in Category:Cretaceous dinosaurs.
However, Cretaceous is around 80 million years long, almost equaled to Late Triassic adding Jurassic. Besides, the Lower Cretaceous Dinosaurs group and Upper Cretaceous Dinosaurs group have obvious differences. My advise is that 「Category:Cretaceous dinosaurs」 can be divided into 「Category:Lower Cretaceous dinosaurs」 and 「Category:Upper Cretaceous dinosaurs」.
Also, I have a question about Dinosaurs in Pakistan. There seveal Dinosaurs found in Pakistan, such as:
Balochisaurus. My question is that whether Pakistan was a part of Indian-Madagascar in Cretaceous, or just a part of Asia continent. If Pakistan was a part of Indian-Madagascar, maybe the above articles should be moved into Category:Dinosaurs of India and Madagascar
hoseumou(talk) 13:59, 12 December 2009 (UTC)
Hadrosaur bipedality
- Fair enough, although I still think it shouldn't be included in the Jurassic Park article for two reasons: the work is unpublished; and perhaps more importantly, it's a bit unfair to call the JP people on it when it was perfectly legitimate to have bipedal running hadrosaurs in the 1990s. I think the page should stick to things that were known to be inaccurate or questionable at the time of production, like sizes and creative embellishments (intelligence, pretty much anything to do with Dilophosaurus, etc.). J. Spencer (talk) 04:39, 7 January 2010 (UTC)
Service awards proposal
Hello, J. Spencer/Archive 3! I noticed you display a service award, and would like to invite you to join the discussion over a proposed revamping of the awards.
If you have any opinions on the proposal, please participate in the discussion. Thanks! — the Man in Question (in question) 04:14, 8 January 2010 (UTC)
Kinkonychelys.
- Thank you very much! Oh no! It's not here!!! (talk) 08:00, 12 January 2010 (UTC)
- Hi again! Following your suggestions, I've gotten the page's main content up to 1227 characters, but of course, it still falls short of the DYK requirement by nearly 300 characters. The only information I can see in the paper about the genus that can still be included is the physical descriptions of the different specimens, and personal experience tells me I'm not too handy when it comes to understanding all of the scientific words used in these descriptions. I really want this article to become a DYK article, though, and I've already seen a few facts in what's been included that might "impress the judges" substantially for inclusion in a DYK update. If it's no trouble, and if any of that information is notable for inclusion in the article, could you please help with adding it in? That would be very much appreciated! Oh no! It's not here!!! (talk) 09:58, 12 January 2010 (UTC)
- Thanks again! Oh no! It's not here!!! (talk) 23:05, 12 January 2010 (UTC)
- Thanks a million, J. Spencer!!! Oh no! It's not here!!! (talk) 00:27, 13 January 2010 (UTC)
Talk:Dinosaur archiving
Deinonychus
- Thank you! I'm not actually very familiar with IPA, but people who are set up the templates on the dinosaur articles, and since this one's been stable for a long time, I figured it was probably a gag or a test edit. J. Spencer (talk) 00:50, 21 January 2010 (UTC)
- I cannot read IPA either - I merely "sounded it out", as you might phrase it. ;) -RadicalOne•Contact Me•Chase My Tail 02:44, 21 January 2010 (UTC)
WikiProject Dinosaurs in the Signpost
Redirects and categories
- Well, it doesn't really bother me either way; it just looked funny having it on a redirect. Species of Psittacosaurus
- I added comments o how to improve the article. GamerPro64 (talk) 01:59, 5 February 2010 (UTC)]
- I sorry to bother you but did you have me give suggestions to improve the article so you can improve the it or for someone else who would want to? GamerPro64 (talk) 23:18, 6 February 2010 (UTC).
- Thank you, J. Spencer!!! Oh no! It's not here!!! (talk) 23:39, 7 February 2010 (UTC)
Reply
Rhabdognathus.
- Okay then. Thank you for the links! Oh no! It's not here!!! (talk) 07:25, 2 March 2010 (UTC)
Linheraptor.
- Thanks! Oh no! It's not here!!! (talk) 02:31, 21 March 2010 (UTC)
Guanlong imageHello,
I've uploaded some images yesterday and put them with some articles.
You said that my images weren't the kind that you're looking for.
Is this one a bit better?
Guanlong wucaii Kind regards from 82.169.6.135 (talk) 13:45, 1 April 2010 (UTC) or better known as Joerim on the Dutch Wikipedia.
Welcome back
Re: Penghusuchus
Brachi and Giraffatitan
- I am torn between keeping a tidy list at the bottom and placing them at first use. I guess the latter is simply more common, and also easier to work with once the text doesn't change much anymore. However, writing the Plateosaurus article showed me that for a total re-write a list at the end would have been better - I spent lots of time searching through the editor. So I guess I'll keep the alphabetical list, and once the text is ready for the main page I'll place the citation at the first use. HMallison (talk) 06:08, 12 May 2010 (UTC)
You're quite right to prod me - however, I must point to the sauropoda re-write, which is devloping into a physiology of dinosaurs update.... I had some rough weeks, work and kids' health wise, but hope to contribute the missing data within the next few days. Then the text will need a thorough massage - was that you vounteering??? ;) HMallison (talk) 06:45, 15 June 2010 (UTC)
- Give me a day or two more, and I'll have a rough structure ready. Then we should talk about it - may or may not be best to use your structure. HMallison (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 15:57, 16 June 2010 (UTC).
If you're into sauropods....here's a must read for you :) Long, boring, but a "deal-breaker", 'cause it has all you ever need to know and cite (I hope).
http://www3.interscience.wiley.com/cgi-bin/fulltext/123397084/HTMLSTART
PDF here:
http://www3.interscience.wiley.com/cgi-bin/fulltext/123397084/PDFSTART
HMallison (talk) 23:35, 16 May 2010 (UTC)
- well, it took me three years to understand it all - but that did involve the research, too ;) Aachenosaurus
- Dunno. I've gone ahead and semi-protected for a month. We'll see if it deters this fellow or fellows. Only the pages listed at Wikipedia:Pending changes/Testing are to be flagged for pending changes. Firsfron of Ronchester 04:10, 9 July 2010 (UTC)
Family treeHi, I'm from the Dutch Wikipedia. Because I want an article to be finished tommorow (I'm going on holliday) I needed help from someone quikly, so I come to you. Maybe you still know me from the illustration of the Guanlong. Here's the problem:
<font color="white">unnamed
<font color="white">unnamed
<font color="white">unnamed
Champsosauridae
<font color="white">unnamed
familie Simoedosauridae
<font color="white">unnamed
?
Champsosauridae
I've got two family trees. The upper one is good, but in front of it there has to be "familie Simoedosauridae", like with the second one. Can you help me, please? Kind regards from 82.169.6.135 (talk) 19:48, 14 July 2010 (UTC) or Joerim, as I'm known at the Dutch Wikipedia.
- Thank you very much! Only one thing, what mistake did I make when making one of these family trees? Kind regards from 82.169.6.135 (talk) 07:35, 15 July 2010 (UTC) or Joerim
Talkback
Concavenator imageHi, I uploaded an image to Concavenator but it was removed due to it not being anatomically rigorous. I did a new one, which is here http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Conc2.png I used this image http://images.nationalgeographic.com/wpf/media-live/photos/000/257/cache/humpback-dinosaur-life-reconstruction_25710_600x450.jpg as a model, but I don't know if mine is yet fit to be used in the article. Any help on how are images judged would be very appreciated (I also posted all this on the article's talk page but I don't know if it will get much attention there).
thank you very much
Nestor db (talk) 18:44, 10 September 2010 (UTC)
Parks ref
-
May I request you to please revisit the above article to review the tag, since another expert on the subject has edited it?--Nvvchar (talk) 09:46, 16 May 2009 (UTC)
- Hey Nvvchar, sorry it's taken me so long to get back. Anyway, it would probably be better to ask J. Spencer about this, since he's the one who did the rewriting and he's more familiar with the content. I'm sure that if he went through it it's probably all fine now, but I'd feel more comfortable letting him remove the tag (since he knows what the state of the article is, whereas all I can do right now is assume—and I'd rather not go through one sentence at a time, as JSpencer probably already has). rʨanaɢ talk/contribs 21:18, 30 May 2009 (UTC)
- Thank you very much. I hope I will have opportunities in the near future on the ]
- Can you nominate this article for GA status since it is already assessed as "B" class and many of
Heterodontosauridae
- I highly doubt that somebody would consider it OR, but it's better to be safe than sorry. Thanks for contacting the other editor, and hopefully a source can be found for it. --Happy editing! Nehrams2020 (talk • contrib) 05:04, 2 June 2009 (UTC)
Piveteau's brain probably was bigger than a walnut
- I think it's great. I think he was a scientific illustrator also; although many scientists at the time did their own illustrations, he was known for his. I tried to confirm this information to include in the article but found nothing specific. The illustrations can be included in both the dinosaur and bio articles, if you can get decent copies. If you don't get decent copies, and I have time, I can resketch at least the most important one of them if they're out of copyright. --69.226.103.13 (talk) 22:56, 2 June 2009 (UTC)
User 173.35.129.119 issues....I just undid a half dozen bad edits of his...again. He just got the temporary ban lifted and is right back at it..
it's gotten to where someone needs to get a perma ban put on that IP address. It's vandalism at this point. I don't know if you have that ability or can get in contact with someone who does, but it's really time. Forescore68 (talk) 16:15, 13 June 2009 (UTC)
- Oh, and thanks for cleaning up my Chuandongocoelurus mess...I did it in a huffy. Glad I don't lose points in this forum for being hasty and dumb...Forescore68 (talk) 02:33, 18 June 2009 (UTC)
Italictitle templateHi, Firs;
I just found out something useful about the italictitle template: I already knew that if it is put at the top, it prevents the uppermost [edit] bracket from showing. However, if it's put below the taxobox, as Bob did at Pteranodon and I just did with Allosaurus, it doesn't interfere. I don't know if this has editing drawbacks, but it's very good to know we can get back the edit bracket for the lede section, especially for ginormous articles. J. Spencer (talk) 01:35, 17 June 2009 (UTC)
- Hey!
- I didn't realize it prevents the uppermost edit link from showing. We might want to bring this up at tree of life. Either this should be fixed through the template itself, or I could possibly AWB it; I think there is a pretty easy way to delete the template name while substituting the same template name immediately below the taxobox. If this is acceptable to you (and everyone else who works in these areas), I could work on this tomorrow. Thanks for catching this. Firsfron of Ronchester 06:17, 17 June 2009 (UTC).
- P.S. Also, I'd like to make sure I interpreted everything I've included in the article correctly. Thanks in advance! Mess around with the guy in shades all you like - don't mess around with the girl in gloves! (talk) 08:28, 26 June 2009 (UTC)
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template. Mess around with the guy in shades all you like - don't mess around with the girl in gloves! (talk) 00:41, 27 June 2009 (UTC)
- I reveiewed the DYK hook for this, and everything looks fine except that I had some minor wording changes to the hook. If you are okay with those changes, please indicate so in its DYK submission at Template talk:Did You Know#Gallardosaurus and I can approve the hook. Rlendog (talk) 02:17, 8 July 2009 (UTC)]
New hoaxHi, Firs;
Here's a new one to nail, if it's still here by the time you read this: Rorasaurus. J. Spencer (talk) 13:19, 1 July 2009 (UTC)
(I'd watch Roarasaurus too, as they may try to recreate it.) J. Spencer (talk) 13:27, 1 July 2009 (UTC)
- Thanks. I've just nuked it. Firsfron of Ronchester 13:53, 1 July 2009 (UTC)
- Yeah, I'm going to start re-inquiring about the possibility of fixing WP:DABS. As you say, if some random IP hadn't added the name to the List, you wouldn't have noticed it. That's not good. Firsfron of Ronchester 00:47, 2 July 2009 (UTC)
- It's true: DABS was just one way of catching potential hoaxes (or very short new articles that editors sometimes create), but it was nice to have that option. Firsfron of Ronchester 04:32, 2 July 2009 (UTC)
- I had no idea it would be that easy. Request, and within an hour, voila! Firsfron of Ronchester 03:21, 13 July 2009 (UTC)
Thanks...
ITN for Australovenator, Diamantinasaurus and Wintonotitan
On In the news candidates page.
--BorgQueen (talk) 20:14, 4 July 2009 (UTC)
2009 hadrosaur chewing study
- I think with any article (media or not) there is a possibility of inaccuracies; that's why we check it with other sources, which is what I did in this Leonardo case. But I respect your opinion. I guess we'll just see where the AFD goes. — Hunter Kahn (c) 17:23, 5 July 2009 (UTC)
DYK for Gallardosaurus
On DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.
Wizardman 08:51, 10 July 2009 (UTC)
HerrerasaurusHey J,
After tomorrow, I am going on a 10-day wikibreak out of state, and may not have a ton of internet access. With the assistance of a lot of folks (including you... thanks, BTW) Herrerasaurus made it to FA, but there are still grammar adjustments that an editor wants to make. Can you take a look? I'm worried I won't be able to devote (much/any) time to genuine concerns over clarity. Firsfron of Ronchester 01:39, 30 July 2009 (UTC)
Carniadactylus.
Loch Ness Monster
- I think s/he’s almost figured out what was needed. Now, if only s/he could figure out how to enter citations fully … — SpikeToronto (talk) 17:21, 14 September 2009 (UTC)
- Well, it looks like it's taken care of, which goes on the positive side in my book. Thank you for the help! J. Spencer (talk) 03:09, 15 September 2009 (UTC)
Those hadrosaurs sure liked to eat, huh?
The Original Barnstar
For substantial additions to the Hadrosaur diet article, I salute you! Abyssal (talk) 03:55, 4 October 2009 (UTC)
Fruitadens
ITN for Fruitadens
On 22 October 2009, In the news was updated with a news item that involved the article Fruitadens, which you substantially updated. If you know of another interesting news item involving a recently created or updated article, then please suggest it on the candidates page.
--BorgQueen (talk) 16:32, 22 October 2009 (UTC)
RajasaurusHi!Spencer,
Congratulations for the GA upgarde of the artcile. Also thanks.--Nvvchar (talk) 18:34, 22 October 2009 (UTC)
Eld's DeerHi! Spencer,
Thanks for the message regarding
Eld's Deer was posted by me on DYK quite some months back and accepted. Since you are an expert in Fauna, will you please advice me if I should post it for GA upgrade. Thanks.--Nvvchar (talk) 02:04, 23 October 2009 (UTC)]
Re: Rajasaurus ga-rev
New find of Dinosaurs nestling ground in IndiaHi! Spencer,
A few days back I had read the above news item in several news papers in India. I have prepared a short write up on the same for any suitable insertion in the Portal or News item. Please see here
User:Nvvchar/sandbox/Ashokan Edicts (Delhi). You may kndly edit it suitably and if it has not appeared on the News page of WP you may consider posting it as a joint news item. Thanks.--Nvvchar (talk) 05:16, 28 October 2009 (UTC)]
Ceratonykus
ScienceDirectHi J,
Do you have access to ScienceDirect? I don't want to pay $31.50 for a paper which discusses "Teleocrater", especially when I don't know how detailed the portion on "Teleocrater" is. The cladogram from their analysis is viewable here, but that doesn't give me much to work with. I figured you being you, you might subscribe to their (rather expensive) service. If not, I'll just leave "Teleo" as he is for now. Firsfron of Ronchester 04:09, 12 November 2009 (UTC)
- Thanks J. As it turns out, a reference librarian I work with has access to the paper, so I now have it. Thanks again for offering. Take care, Firsfron of Ronchester 00:25, 13 November 2009 (UTC)
"Name"?
I know the scientific name should type in Name. But i see lots of scientific name in wikipedia were type in "Name". Why?
Is that official rules that Nomen nudum, Nomen oblitum, Nomen dubium should type in "Name"? or it is just a wikipedia rules? User:Devilfish1962 01:43, 26 Nov. 2009 (UTC)
96.239.237.62Hi, Firs;
I noticed you reverted
Bayosaurus". Having fixed a string of their edits this morning, I am 99% certain that this is the latest version of an editor who was recently blocked at 96.242.198.33 (talk · contribs) for inserting false dates, locations, and other information to paleo articles, and false episodes and voice actors to television shows. Something to keep an eye on, I suppose. J. Spencer (talk) 16:21, 28 November 2009 (UTC)]
- Hi J. Thanks. I wasn't aware of that. Something else to watch out for is this. Firsfron of Ronchester 17:07, 28 November 2009 (UTC)
ThescelosaurusHey J,
It looks like the Hungarian version of Thescelosaurus has become a FA! You're making a difference, even in languages you don't speak. :) (At least, I assume you don't speak Hungarian...) Firsfron of Ronchester 05:52, 30 November 2009 (UTC)
- That's a really weird discovery. I have the 2008 archosauriform histology study at work (I left it on my desk and I'm at home now), and they still treated "Teleocrater" as if it wasn't described. Despite being undescribed, the 2008 study, too, did give a lot of detail (about half a page, as I recall), as well as some illustrations. How does something remain "undescribed" when there's that much detail? I'll take another look tomorrow, but I'm pretty sure the '08 study didn't mention a specific epithet (or I would definitely have mentioned it in the article), and it certainly didn't mention "Thecodontosaurus" alophos or alphos. Firsfron of Ronchester 05:22, 1 December 2009 (UTC)
An idea I wanted to run by you
- I'm glad you like the idea. I doubt Naish and the gang would get too involved, but where the two projects overlap, they may be willing to help. I'm gonna do some more brain storming, maybe a rough draft or two and then send the Dinolist a message. Abyssal (talk) 00:28, 3 December 2009 (UTC)
DYK for Stegomosuchus
On DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.
Materialscientist (talk) 11:44, 3 December 2009 (UTC)
Category:Cretaceous dinosaursHello J. Spencer, I have an advise about Category of Dinosaurs. At present, there are 56 articles in Category:Triassic dinosaurs, 245 articles in Category:Jurassic dinosaurs, and 617 articles in Category:Cretaceous dinosaurs.
However, Cretaceous is around 80 million years long, almost equaled to Late Triassic adding Jurassic. Besides, the Lower Cretaceous Dinosaurs group and Upper Cretaceous Dinosaurs group have obvious differences. My advise is that 「Category:Cretaceous dinosaurs」 can be divided into 「Category:Lower Cretaceous dinosaurs」 and 「Category:Upper Cretaceous dinosaurs」.
Also, I have a question about Dinosaurs in Pakistan. There seveal Dinosaurs found in Pakistan, such as:
Balochisaurus. My question is that whether Pakistan was a part of Indian-Madagascar in Cretaceous, or just a part of Asia continent. If Pakistan was a part of Indian-Madagascar, maybe the above articles should be moved into Category:Dinosaurs of India and Madagascar
hoseumou(talk) 13:59, 12 December 2009 (UTC)
Hadrosaur bipedality
- Fair enough, although I still think it shouldn't be included in the Jurassic Park article for two reasons: the work is unpublished; and perhaps more importantly, it's a bit unfair to call the JP people on it when it was perfectly legitimate to have bipedal running hadrosaurs in the 1990s. I think the page should stick to things that were known to be inaccurate or questionable at the time of production, like sizes and creative embellishments (intelligence, pretty much anything to do with Dilophosaurus, etc.). J. Spencer (talk) 04:39, 7 January 2010 (UTC)
Service awards proposal
Hello, J. Spencer/Archive 3! I noticed you display a service award, and would like to invite you to join the discussion over a proposed revamping of the awards.
If you have any opinions on the proposal, please participate in the discussion. Thanks! — the Man in Question (in question) 04:14, 8 January 2010 (UTC)
Kinkonychelys.
- Thank you very much! Oh no! It's not here!!! (talk) 08:00, 12 January 2010 (UTC)
- Hi again! Following your suggestions, I've gotten the page's main content up to 1227 characters, but of course, it still falls short of the DYK requirement by nearly 300 characters. The only information I can see in the paper about the genus that can still be included is the physical descriptions of the different specimens, and personal experience tells me I'm not too handy when it comes to understanding all of the scientific words used in these descriptions. I really want this article to become a DYK article, though, and I've already seen a few facts in what's been included that might "impress the judges" substantially for inclusion in a DYK update. If it's no trouble, and if any of that information is notable for inclusion in the article, could you please help with adding it in? That would be very much appreciated! Oh no! It's not here!!! (talk) 09:58, 12 January 2010 (UTC)
- Thanks again! Oh no! It's not here!!! (talk) 23:05, 12 January 2010 (UTC)
- Thanks a million, J. Spencer!!! Oh no! It's not here!!! (talk) 00:27, 13 January 2010 (UTC)
Talk:Dinosaur archiving
Deinonychus
- Thank you! I'm not actually very familiar with IPA, but people who are set up the templates on the dinosaur articles, and since this one's been stable for a long time, I figured it was probably a gag or a test edit. J. Spencer (talk) 00:50, 21 January 2010 (UTC)
- I cannot read IPA either - I merely "sounded it out", as you might phrase it. ;) -RadicalOne•Contact Me•Chase My Tail 02:44, 21 January 2010 (UTC)
WikiProject Dinosaurs in the Signpost
Redirects and categories
- Well, it doesn't really bother me either way; it just looked funny having it on a redirect. Species of Psittacosaurus
- I added comments o how to improve the article. GamerPro64 (talk) 01:59, 5 February 2010 (UTC)]
- I sorry to bother you but did you have me give suggestions to improve the article so you can improve the it or for someone else who would want to? GamerPro64 (talk) 23:18, 6 February 2010 (UTC).
- Thank you, J. Spencer!!! Oh no! It's not here!!! (talk) 23:39, 7 February 2010 (UTC)
Reply
Rhabdognathus.
- Okay then. Thank you for the links! Oh no! It's not here!!! (talk) 07:25, 2 March 2010 (UTC)
Linheraptor.
- Thanks! Oh no! It's not here!!! (talk) 02:31, 21 March 2010 (UTC)
Guanlong imageHello,
I've uploaded some images yesterday and put them with some articles.
You said that my images weren't the kind that you're looking for.
Is this one a bit better?
Guanlong wucaii Kind regards from 82.169.6.135 (talk) 13:45, 1 April 2010 (UTC) or better known as Joerim on the Dutch Wikipedia.
Welcome back
Re: Penghusuchus
Brachi and Giraffatitan
- I am torn between keeping a tidy list at the bottom and placing them at first use. I guess the latter is simply more common, and also easier to work with once the text doesn't change much anymore. However, writing the Plateosaurus article showed me that for a total re-write a list at the end would have been better - I spent lots of time searching through the editor. So I guess I'll keep the alphabetical list, and once the text is ready for the main page I'll place the citation at the first use. HMallison (talk) 06:08, 12 May 2010 (UTC)
You're quite right to prod me - however, I must point to the sauropoda re-write, which is devloping into a physiology of dinosaurs update.... I had some rough weeks, work and kids' health wise, but hope to contribute the missing data within the next few days. Then the text will need a thorough massage - was that you vounteering??? ;) HMallison (talk) 06:45, 15 June 2010 (UTC)
- Give me a day or two more, and I'll have a rough structure ready. Then we should talk about it - may or may not be best to use your structure. HMallison (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 15:57, 16 June 2010 (UTC).
If you're into sauropods....here's a must read for you :) Long, boring, but a "deal-breaker", 'cause it has all you ever need to know and cite (I hope).
http://www3.interscience.wiley.com/cgi-bin/fulltext/123397084/HTMLSTART
PDF here:
http://www3.interscience.wiley.com/cgi-bin/fulltext/123397084/PDFSTART
HMallison (talk) 23:35, 16 May 2010 (UTC)
- well, it took me three years to understand it all - but that did involve the research, too ;) Aachenosaurus
- Dunno. I've gone ahead and semi-protected for a month. We'll see if it deters this fellow or fellows. Only the pages listed at Wikipedia:Pending changes/Testing are to be flagged for pending changes. Firsfron of Ronchester 04:10, 9 July 2010 (UTC)
Family treeHi, I'm from the Dutch Wikipedia. Because I want an article to be finished tommorow (I'm going on holliday) I needed help from someone quikly, so I come to you. Maybe you still know me from the illustration of the Guanlong. Here's the problem:
<font color="white">unnamed
<font color="white">unnamed
<font color="white">unnamed
Champsosauridae
<font color="white">unnamed
familie Simoedosauridae
<font color="white">unnamed
?
Champsosauridae
I've got two family trees. The upper one is good, but in front of it there has to be "familie Simoedosauridae", like with the second one. Can you help me, please? Kind regards from 82.169.6.135 (talk) 19:48, 14 July 2010 (UTC) or Joerim, as I'm known at the Dutch Wikipedia.
- Thank you very much! Only one thing, what mistake did I make when making one of these family trees? Kind regards from 82.169.6.135 (talk) 07:35, 15 July 2010 (UTC) or Joerim
Talkback
Concavenator imageHi, I uploaded an image to Concavenator but it was removed due to it not being anatomically rigorous. I did a new one, which is here http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Conc2.png I used this image http://images.nationalgeographic.com/wpf/media-live/photos/000/257/cache/humpback-dinosaur-life-reconstruction_25710_600x450.jpg as a model, but I don't know if mine is yet fit to be used in the article. Any help on how are images judged would be very appreciated (I also posted all this on the article's talk page but I don't know if it will get much attention there).
thank you very much
Nestor db (talk) 18:44, 10 September 2010 (UTC)
Parks ref
-
Piveteau's brain probably was bigger than a walnut
- I think it's great. I think he was a scientific illustrator also; although many scientists at the time did their own illustrations, he was known for his. I tried to confirm this information to include in the article but found nothing specific. The illustrations can be included in both the dinosaur and bio articles, if you can get decent copies. If you don't get decent copies, and I have time, I can resketch at least the most important one of them if they're out of copyright. --69.226.103.13 (talk) 22:56, 2 June 2009 (UTC)
User 173.35.129.119 issues....I just undid a half dozen bad edits of his...again. He just got the temporary ban lifted and is right back at it..
it's gotten to where someone needs to get a perma ban put on that IP address. It's vandalism at this point. I don't know if you have that ability or can get in contact with someone who does, but it's really time. Forescore68 (talk) 16:15, 13 June 2009 (UTC)
- Oh, and thanks for cleaning up my Chuandongocoelurus mess...I did it in a huffy. Glad I don't lose points in this forum for being hasty and dumb...Forescore68 (talk) 02:33, 18 June 2009 (UTC)
Italictitle templateHi, Firs;
I just found out something useful about the italictitle template: I already knew that if it is put at the top, it prevents the uppermost [edit] bracket from showing. However, if it's put below the taxobox, as Bob did at Pteranodon and I just did with Allosaurus, it doesn't interfere. I don't know if this has editing drawbacks, but it's very good to know we can get back the edit bracket for the lede section, especially for ginormous articles. J. Spencer (talk) 01:35, 17 June 2009 (UTC)
- Hey!
- I didn't realize it prevents the uppermost edit link from showing. We might want to bring this up at tree of life. Either this should be fixed through the template itself, or I could possibly AWB it; I think there is a pretty easy way to delete the template name while substituting the same template name immediately below the taxobox. If this is acceptable to you (and everyone else who works in these areas), I could work on this tomorrow. Thanks for catching this. Firsfron of Ronchester 06:17, 17 June 2009 (UTC).
- P.S. Also, I'd like to make sure I interpreted everything I've included in the article correctly. Thanks in advance! Mess around with the guy in shades all you like - don't mess around with the girl in gloves! (talk) 08:28, 26 June 2009 (UTC)
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template. Mess around with the guy in shades all you like - don't mess around with the girl in gloves! (talk) 00:41, 27 June 2009 (UTC)
- I reveiewed the DYK hook for this, and everything looks fine except that I had some minor wording changes to the hook. If you are okay with those changes, please indicate so in its DYK submission at Template talk:Did You Know#Gallardosaurus and I can approve the hook. Rlendog (talk) 02:17, 8 July 2009 (UTC)]
New hoaxHi, Firs;
Here's a new one to nail, if it's still here by the time you read this: Rorasaurus. J. Spencer (talk) 13:19, 1 July 2009 (UTC)
(I'd watch Roarasaurus too, as they may try to recreate it.) J. Spencer (talk) 13:27, 1 July 2009 (UTC)
- Thanks. I've just nuked it. Firsfron of Ronchester 13:53, 1 July 2009 (UTC)
- Yeah, I'm going to start re-inquiring about the possibility of fixing WP:DABS. As you say, if some random IP hadn't added the name to the List, you wouldn't have noticed it. That's not good. Firsfron of Ronchester 00:47, 2 July 2009 (UTC)
- It's true: DABS was just one way of catching potential hoaxes (or very short new articles that editors sometimes create), but it was nice to have that option. Firsfron of Ronchester 04:32, 2 July 2009 (UTC)
- I had no idea it would be that easy. Request, and within an hour, voila! Firsfron of Ronchester 03:21, 13 July 2009 (UTC)
Thanks...
ITN for Australovenator, Diamantinasaurus and Wintonotitan
On In the news candidates page.
--BorgQueen (talk) 20:14, 4 July 2009 (UTC)
2009 hadrosaur chewing study
- I think with any article (media or not) there is a possibility of inaccuracies; that's why we check it with other sources, which is what I did in this Leonardo case. But I respect your opinion. I guess we'll just see where the AFD goes. — Hunter Kahn (c) 17:23, 5 July 2009 (UTC)
DYK for Gallardosaurus
On DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.
Wizardman 08:51, 10 July 2009 (UTC)
HerrerasaurusHey J,
After tomorrow, I am going on a 10-day wikibreak out of state, and may not have a ton of internet access. With the assistance of a lot of folks (including you... thanks, BTW) Herrerasaurus made it to FA, but there are still grammar adjustments that an editor wants to make. Can you take a look? I'm worried I won't be able to devote (much/any) time to genuine concerns over clarity. Firsfron of Ronchester 01:39, 30 July 2009 (UTC)
Carniadactylus.
Loch Ness Monster
- I think s/he’s almost figured out what was needed. Now, if only s/he could figure out how to enter citations fully … — SpikeToronto (talk) 17:21, 14 September 2009 (UTC)
- Well, it looks like it's taken care of, which goes on the positive side in my book. Thank you for the help! J. Spencer (talk) 03:09, 15 September 2009 (UTC)
Those hadrosaurs sure liked to eat, huh?
The Original Barnstar
For substantial additions to the Hadrosaur diet article, I salute you! Abyssal (talk) 03:55, 4 October 2009 (UTC)
Fruitadens
ITN for Fruitadens
On 22 October 2009, In the news was updated with a news item that involved the article Fruitadens, which you substantially updated. If you know of another interesting news item involving a recently created or updated article, then please suggest it on the candidates page.
--BorgQueen (talk) 16:32, 22 October 2009 (UTC)
RajasaurusHi!Spencer,
Congratulations for the GA upgarde of the artcile. Also thanks.--Nvvchar (talk) 18:34, 22 October 2009 (UTC)
Eld's DeerHi! Spencer,
Thanks for the message regarding
Eld's Deer was posted by me on DYK quite some months back and accepted. Since you are an expert in Fauna, will you please advice me if I should post it for GA upgrade. Thanks.--Nvvchar (talk) 02:04, 23 October 2009 (UTC)]
Re: Rajasaurus ga-rev
New find of Dinosaurs nestling ground in IndiaHi! Spencer,
A few days back I had read the above news item in several news papers in India. I have prepared a short write up on the same for any suitable insertion in the Portal or News item. Please see here
User:Nvvchar/sandbox/Ashokan Edicts (Delhi). You may kndly edit it suitably and if it has not appeared on the News page of WP you may consider posting it as a joint news item. Thanks.--Nvvchar (talk) 05:16, 28 October 2009 (UTC)]
Ceratonykus
ScienceDirectHi J,
Do you have access to ScienceDirect? I don't want to pay $31.50 for a paper which discusses "Teleocrater", especially when I don't know how detailed the portion on "Teleocrater" is. The cladogram from their analysis is viewable here, but that doesn't give me much to work with. I figured you being you, you might subscribe to their (rather expensive) service. If not, I'll just leave "Teleo" as he is for now. Firsfron of Ronchester 04:09, 12 November 2009 (UTC)
- Thanks J. As it turns out, a reference librarian I work with has access to the paper, so I now have it. Thanks again for offering. Take care, Firsfron of Ronchester 00:25, 13 November 2009 (UTC)
"Name"?
I know the scientific name should type in Name. But i see lots of scientific name in wikipedia were type in "Name". Why?
Is that official rules that Nomen nudum, Nomen oblitum, Nomen dubium should type in "Name"? or it is just a wikipedia rules? User:Devilfish1962 01:43, 26 Nov. 2009 (UTC)
96.239.237.62Hi, Firs;
I noticed you reverted
Bayosaurus". Having fixed a string of their edits this morning, I am 99% certain that this is the latest version of an editor who was recently blocked at 96.242.198.33 (talk · contribs) for inserting false dates, locations, and other information to paleo articles, and false episodes and voice actors to television shows. Something to keep an eye on, I suppose. J. Spencer (talk) 16:21, 28 November 2009 (UTC)]
- Hi J. Thanks. I wasn't aware of that. Something else to watch out for is this. Firsfron of Ronchester 17:07, 28 November 2009 (UTC)
ThescelosaurusHey J,
It looks like the Hungarian version of Thescelosaurus has become a FA! You're making a difference, even in languages you don't speak. :) (At least, I assume you don't speak Hungarian...) Firsfron of Ronchester 05:52, 30 November 2009 (UTC)
- That's a really weird discovery. I have the 2008 archosauriform histology study at work (I left it on my desk and I'm at home now), and they still treated "Teleocrater" as if it wasn't described. Despite being undescribed, the 2008 study, too, did give a lot of detail (about half a page, as I recall), as well as some illustrations. How does something remain "undescribed" when there's that much detail? I'll take another look tomorrow, but I'm pretty sure the '08 study didn't mention a specific epithet (or I would definitely have mentioned it in the article), and it certainly didn't mention "Thecodontosaurus" alophos or alphos. Firsfron of Ronchester 05:22, 1 December 2009 (UTC)
An idea I wanted to run by you
- I'm glad you like the idea. I doubt Naish and the gang would get too involved, but where the two projects overlap, they may be willing to help. I'm gonna do some more brain storming, maybe a rough draft or two and then send the Dinolist a message. Abyssal (talk) 00:28, 3 December 2009 (UTC)
DYK for Stegomosuchus
On DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.
Materialscientist (talk) 11:44, 3 December 2009 (UTC)
Category:Cretaceous dinosaursHello J. Spencer, I have an advise about Category of Dinosaurs. At present, there are 56 articles in Category:Triassic dinosaurs, 245 articles in Category:Jurassic dinosaurs, and 617 articles in Category:Cretaceous dinosaurs.
However, Cretaceous is around 80 million years long, almost equaled to Late Triassic adding Jurassic. Besides, the Lower Cretaceous Dinosaurs group and Upper Cretaceous Dinosaurs group have obvious differences. My advise is that 「Category:Cretaceous dinosaurs」 can be divided into 「Category:Lower Cretaceous dinosaurs」 and 「Category:Upper Cretaceous dinosaurs」.
Also, I have a question about Dinosaurs in Pakistan. There seveal Dinosaurs found in Pakistan, such as:
Balochisaurus. My question is that whether Pakistan was a part of Indian-Madagascar in Cretaceous, or just a part of Asia continent. If Pakistan was a part of Indian-Madagascar, maybe the above articles should be moved into Category:Dinosaurs of India and Madagascar
hoseumou(talk) 13:59, 12 December 2009 (UTC)
Hadrosaur bipedality
- Fair enough, although I still think it shouldn't be included in the Jurassic Park article for two reasons: the work is unpublished; and perhaps more importantly, it's a bit unfair to call the JP people on it when it was perfectly legitimate to have bipedal running hadrosaurs in the 1990s. I think the page should stick to things that were known to be inaccurate or questionable at the time of production, like sizes and creative embellishments (intelligence, pretty much anything to do with Dilophosaurus, etc.). J. Spencer (talk) 04:39, 7 January 2010 (UTC)
Service awards proposal
Hello, J. Spencer/Archive 3! I noticed you display a service award, and would like to invite you to join the discussion over a proposed revamping of the awards.
If you have any opinions on the proposal, please participate in the discussion. Thanks! — the Man in Question (in question) 04:14, 8 January 2010 (UTC)
Kinkonychelys.
- Thank you very much! Oh no! It's not here!!! (talk) 08:00, 12 January 2010 (UTC)
- Hi again! Following your suggestions, I've gotten the page's main content up to 1227 characters, but of course, it still falls short of the DYK requirement by nearly 300 characters. The only information I can see in the paper about the genus that can still be included is the physical descriptions of the different specimens, and personal experience tells me I'm not too handy when it comes to understanding all of the scientific words used in these descriptions. I really want this article to become a DYK article, though, and I've already seen a few facts in what's been included that might "impress the judges" substantially for inclusion in a DYK update. If it's no trouble, and if any of that information is notable for inclusion in the article, could you please help with adding it in? That would be very much appreciated! Oh no! It's not here!!! (talk) 09:58, 12 January 2010 (UTC)
- Thanks again! Oh no! It's not here!!! (talk) 23:05, 12 January 2010 (UTC)
- Thanks a million, J. Spencer!!! Oh no! It's not here!!! (talk) 00:27, 13 January 2010 (UTC)
Talk:Dinosaur archiving
Deinonychus
- Thank you! I'm not actually very familiar with IPA, but people who are set up the templates on the dinosaur articles, and since this one's been stable for a long time, I figured it was probably a gag or a test edit. J. Spencer (talk) 00:50, 21 January 2010 (UTC)
- I cannot read IPA either - I merely "sounded it out", as you might phrase it. ;) -RadicalOne•Contact Me•Chase My Tail 02:44, 21 January 2010 (UTC)
WikiProject Dinosaurs in the Signpost
Redirects and categories
- Well, it doesn't really bother me either way; it just looked funny having it on a redirect. Species of Psittacosaurus
- I added comments o how to improve the article. GamerPro64 (talk) 01:59, 5 February 2010 (UTC)]
- I sorry to bother you but did you have me give suggestions to improve the article so you can improve the it or for someone else who would want to? GamerPro64 (talk) 23:18, 6 February 2010 (UTC).
- Thank you, J. Spencer!!! Oh no! It's not here!!! (talk) 23:39, 7 February 2010 (UTC)
Reply
Rhabdognathus.
- Okay then. Thank you for the links! Oh no! It's not here!!! (talk) 07:25, 2 March 2010 (UTC)
Linheraptor.
- Thanks! Oh no! It's not here!!! (talk) 02:31, 21 March 2010 (UTC)
Guanlong imageHello,
I've uploaded some images yesterday and put them with some articles.
You said that my images weren't the kind that you're looking for.
Is this one a bit better?
Guanlong wucaii Kind regards from 82.169.6.135 (talk) 13:45, 1 April 2010 (UTC) or better known as Joerim on the Dutch Wikipedia.
Welcome back
Re: Penghusuchus
Brachi and Giraffatitan
- I am torn between keeping a tidy list at the bottom and placing them at first use. I guess the latter is simply more common, and also easier to work with once the text doesn't change much anymore. However, writing the Plateosaurus article showed me that for a total re-write a list at the end would have been better - I spent lots of time searching through the editor. So I guess I'll keep the alphabetical list, and once the text is ready for the main page I'll place the citation at the first use. HMallison (talk) 06:08, 12 May 2010 (UTC)
You're quite right to prod me - however, I must point to the sauropoda re-write, which is devloping into a physiology of dinosaurs update.... I had some rough weeks, work and kids' health wise, but hope to contribute the missing data within the next few days. Then the text will need a thorough massage - was that you vounteering??? ;) HMallison (talk) 06:45, 15 June 2010 (UTC)
- Give me a day or two more, and I'll have a rough structure ready. Then we should talk about it - may or may not be best to use your structure. HMallison (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 15:57, 16 June 2010 (UTC).
If you're into sauropods....here's a must read for you :) Long, boring, but a "deal-breaker", 'cause it has all you ever need to know and cite (I hope).
http://www3.interscience.wiley.com/cgi-bin/fulltext/123397084/HTMLSTART
PDF here:
http://www3.interscience.wiley.com/cgi-bin/fulltext/123397084/PDFSTART
HMallison (talk) 23:35, 16 May 2010 (UTC)
- well, it took me three years to understand it all - but that did involve the research, too ;) Aachenosaurus
- Dunno. I've gone ahead and semi-protected for a month. We'll see if it deters this fellow or fellows. Only the pages listed at Wikipedia:Pending changes/Testing are to be flagged for pending changes. Firsfron of Ronchester 04:10, 9 July 2010 (UTC)
Family treeHi, I'm from the Dutch Wikipedia. Because I want an article to be finished tommorow (I'm going on holliday) I needed help from someone quikly, so I come to you. Maybe you still know me from the illustration of the Guanlong. Here's the problem:
<font color="white">unnamed
<font color="white">unnamed
<font color="white">unnamed
Champsosauridae
<font color="white">unnamed
familie Simoedosauridae
<font color="white">unnamed
?
Champsosauridae
I've got two family trees. The upper one is good, but in front of it there has to be "familie Simoedosauridae", like with the second one. Can you help me, please? Kind regards from 82.169.6.135 (talk) 19:48, 14 July 2010 (UTC) or Joerim, as I'm known at the Dutch Wikipedia.
- Thank you very much! Only one thing, what mistake did I make when making one of these family trees? Kind regards from 82.169.6.135 (talk) 07:35, 15 July 2010 (UTC) or Joerim
Talkback
Concavenator imageHi, I uploaded an image to Concavenator but it was removed due to it not being anatomically rigorous. I did a new one, which is here http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Conc2.png I used this image http://images.nationalgeographic.com/wpf/media-live/photos/000/257/cache/humpback-dinosaur-life-reconstruction_25710_600x450.jpg as a model, but I don't know if mine is yet fit to be used in the article. Any help on how are images judged would be very appreciated (I also posted all this on the article's talk page but I don't know if it will get much attention there).
thank you very much
Nestor db (talk) 18:44, 10 September 2010 (UTC)
Parks ref
-
User 173.35.129.119 issues....I just undid a half dozen bad edits of his...again. He just got the temporary ban lifted and is right back at it..
it's gotten to where someone needs to get a perma ban put on that IP address. It's vandalism at this point. I don't know if you have that ability or can get in contact with someone who does, but it's really time. Forescore68 (talk) 16:15, 13 June 2009 (UTC)
- Oh, and thanks for cleaning up my Chuandongocoelurus mess...I did it in a huffy. Glad I don't lose points in this forum for being hasty and dumb...Forescore68 (talk) 02:33, 18 June 2009 (UTC)
Italictitle templateHi, Firs;
I just found out something useful about the italictitle template: I already knew that if it is put at the top, it prevents the uppermost [edit] bracket from showing. However, if it's put below the taxobox, as Bob did at Pteranodon and I just did with Allosaurus, it doesn't interfere. I don't know if this has editing drawbacks, but it's very good to know we can get back the edit bracket for the lede section, especially for ginormous articles. J. Spencer (talk) 01:35, 17 June 2009 (UTC)
- Hey!
- I didn't realize it prevents the uppermost edit link from showing. We might want to bring this up at tree of life. Either this should be fixed through the template itself, or I could possibly AWB it; I think there is a pretty easy way to delete the template name while substituting the same template name immediately below the taxobox. If this is acceptable to you (and everyone else who works in these areas), I could work on this tomorrow. Thanks for catching this. Firsfron of Ronchester 06:17, 17 June 2009 (UTC).
- P.S. Also, I'd like to make sure I interpreted everything I've included in the article correctly. Thanks in advance! Mess around with the guy in shades all you like - don't mess around with the girl in gloves! (talk) 08:28, 26 June 2009 (UTC)
- Mess around with the guy in shades all you like - don't mess around with the girl in gloves! (talk) 00:41, 27 June 2009 (UTC)
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.- I reveiewed the DYK hook for this, and everything looks fine except that I had some minor wording changes to the hook. If you are okay with those changes, please indicate so in its DYK submission at Template talk:Did You Know#Gallardosaurus and I can approve the hook. Rlendog (talk) 02:17, 8 July 2009 (UTC)]
- I reveiewed the DYK hook for this, and everything looks fine except that I had some minor wording changes to the hook. If you are okay with those changes, please indicate so in its DYK submission at
New hoaxHi, Firs;
Here's a new one to nail, if it's still here by the time you read this: Rorasaurus. J. Spencer (talk) 13:19, 1 July 2009 (UTC) (I'd watch Roarasaurus too, as they may try to recreate it.) J. Spencer (talk) 13:27, 1 July 2009 (UTC)
- Thanks. I've just nuked it. Firsfron of Ronchester 13:53, 1 July 2009 (UTC)
- Yeah, I'm going to start re-inquiring about the possibility of fixing WP:DABS. As you say, if some random IP hadn't added the name to the List, you wouldn't have noticed it. That's not good. Firsfron of Ronchester 00:47, 2 July 2009 (UTC)
- It's true: DABS was just one way of catching potential hoaxes (or very short new articles that editors sometimes create), but it was nice to have that option. Firsfron of Ronchester 04:32, 2 July 2009 (UTC)
- I had no idea it would be that easy. Request, and within an hour, voila! Firsfron of Ronchester 03:21, 13 July 2009 (UTC)
- It's true: DABS was just one way of catching potential hoaxes (or very short new articles that editors sometimes create), but it was nice to have that option. Firsfron of Ronchester 04:32, 2 July 2009 (UTC)
- Yeah, I'm going to start re-inquiring about the possibility of fixing WP:DABS. As you say, if some random IP hadn't added the name to the List, you wouldn't have noticed it. That's not good. Firsfron of Ronchester 00:47, 2 July 2009 (UTC)
Thanks...
ITN for Australovenator, Diamantinasaurus and Wintonotitan
On In the news candidates page.--BorgQueen (talk) 20:14, 4 July 2009 (UTC)
2009 hadrosaur chewing study- I think with any article (media or not) there is a possibility of inaccuracies; that's why we check it with other sources, which is what I did in this Leonardo case. But I respect your opinion. I guess we'll just see where the AFD goes. — Hunter Kahn (c) 17:23, 5 July 2009 (UTC)
DYK for Gallardosaurus
On DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.Wizardman 08:51, 10 July 2009 (UTC)
HerrerasaurusHey J,
After tomorrow, I am going on a 10-day wikibreak out of state, and may not have a ton of internet access. With the assistance of a lot of folks (including you... thanks, BTW) Herrerasaurus made it to FA, but there are still grammar adjustments that an editor wants to make. Can you take a look? I'm worried I won't be able to devote (much/any) time to genuine concerns over clarity. Firsfron of Ronchester 01:39, 30 July 2009 (UTC)
Carniadactylus.
Loch Ness Monster
- I think s/he’s almost figured out what was needed. Now, if only s/he could figure out how to enter citations fully … — SpikeToronto (talk) 17:21, 14 September 2009 (UTC)
- Well, it looks like it's taken care of, which goes on the positive side in my book. Thank you for the help! J. Spencer (talk) 03:09, 15 September 2009 (UTC)
Those hadrosaurs sure liked to eat, huh?
The Original Barnstar For substantial additions to the Hadrosaur diet article, I salute you! Abyssal (talk) 03:55, 4 October 2009 (UTC) Fruitadens
ITN for Fruitadens
On 22 October 2009, In the news was updated with a news item that involved the article Fruitadens, which you substantially updated. If you know of another interesting news item involving a recently created or updated article, then please suggest it on the candidates page. --BorgQueen (talk) 16:32, 22 October 2009 (UTC)
RajasaurusHi!Spencer,
Congratulations for the GA upgarde of the artcile. Also thanks.--Nvvchar (talk) 18:34, 22 October 2009 (UTC)
Eld's DeerHi! Spencer,
Thanks for the message regarding
Eld's Deer was posted by me on DYK quite some months back and accepted. Since you are an expert in Fauna, will you please advice me if I should post it for GA upgrade. Thanks.--Nvvchar (talk) 02:04, 23 October 2009 (UTC)]Re: Rajasaurus ga-rev
New find of Dinosaurs nestling ground in IndiaHi! Spencer,
A few days back I had read the above news item in several news papers in India. I have prepared a short write up on the same for any suitable insertion in the Portal or News item. Please see here
User:Nvvchar/sandbox/Ashokan Edicts (Delhi). You may kndly edit it suitably and if it has not appeared on the News page of WP you may consider posting it as a joint news item. Thanks.--Nvvchar (talk) 05:16, 28 October 2009 (UTC)]Ceratonykus
ScienceDirectHi J,
Do you have access to ScienceDirect? I don't want to pay $31.50 for a paper which discusses "Teleocrater", especially when I don't know how detailed the portion on "Teleocrater" is. The cladogram from their analysis is viewable here, but that doesn't give me much to work with. I figured you being you, you might subscribe to their (rather expensive) service. If not, I'll just leave "Teleo" as he is for now. Firsfron of Ronchester 04:09, 12 November 2009 (UTC)
- Thanks J. As it turns out, a reference librarian I work with has access to the paper, so I now have it. Thanks again for offering. Take care, Firsfron of Ronchester 00:25, 13 November 2009 (UTC)
"Name"?
I know the scientific name should type in Name. But i see lots of scientific name in wikipedia were type in "Name". Why?
Is that official rules that Nomen nudum, Nomen oblitum, Nomen dubium should type in "Name"? or it is just a wikipedia rules? User:Devilfish1962 01:43, 26 Nov. 2009 (UTC)
96.239.237.62Hi, Firs;
I noticed you reverted
Bayosaurus". Having fixed a string of their edits this morning, I am 99% certain that this is the latest version of an editor who was recently blocked at 96.242.198.33 (talk · contribs) for inserting false dates, locations, and other information to paleo articles, and false episodes and voice actors to television shows. Something to keep an eye on, I suppose. J. Spencer (talk) 16:21, 28 November 2009 (UTC)]- Hi J. Thanks. I wasn't aware of that. Something else to watch out for is this. Firsfron of Ronchester 17:07, 28 November 2009 (UTC)
ThescelosaurusHey J,
It looks like the Hungarian version of Thescelosaurus has become a FA! You're making a difference, even in languages you don't speak. :) (At least, I assume you don't speak Hungarian...) Firsfron of Ronchester 05:52, 30 November 2009 (UTC)
- That's a really weird discovery. I have the 2008 archosauriform histology study at work (I left it on my desk and I'm at home now), and they still treated "Teleocrater" as if it wasn't described. Despite being undescribed, the 2008 study, too, did give a lot of detail (about half a page, as I recall), as well as some illustrations. How does something remain "undescribed" when there's that much detail? I'll take another look tomorrow, but I'm pretty sure the '08 study didn't mention a specific epithet (or I would definitely have mentioned it in the article), and it certainly didn't mention "Thecodontosaurus" alophos or alphos. Firsfron of Ronchester 05:22, 1 December 2009 (UTC)
An idea I wanted to run by you
- I'm glad you like the idea. I doubt Naish and the gang would get too involved, but where the two projects overlap, they may be willing to help. I'm gonna do some more brain storming, maybe a rough draft or two and then send the Dinolist a message. Abyssal (talk) 00:28, 3 December 2009 (UTC)
DYK for Stegomosuchus
On DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.Materialscientist (talk) 11:44, 3 December 2009 (UTC)
Category:Cretaceous dinosaursHello J. Spencer, I have an advise about Category of Dinosaurs. At present, there are 56 articles in Category:Triassic dinosaurs, 245 articles in Category:Jurassic dinosaurs, and 617 articles in Category:Cretaceous dinosaurs.
However, Cretaceous is around 80 million years long, almost equaled to Late Triassic adding Jurassic. Besides, the Lower Cretaceous Dinosaurs group and Upper Cretaceous Dinosaurs group have obvious differences. My advise is that 「Category:Cretaceous dinosaurs」 can be divided into 「Category:Lower Cretaceous dinosaurs」 and 「Category:Upper Cretaceous dinosaurs」.
Also, I have a question about Dinosaurs in Pakistan. There seveal Dinosaurs found in Pakistan, such as:
Balochisaurus. My question is that whether Pakistan was a part of Indian-Madagascar in Cretaceous, or just a part of Asia continent. If Pakistan was a part of Indian-Madagascar, maybe the above articles should be moved into Category:Dinosaurs of India and Madagascarhoseumou(talk) 13:59, 12 December 2009 (UTC)
Hadrosaur bipedality
- Fair enough, although I still think it shouldn't be included in the Jurassic Park article for two reasons: the work is unpublished; and perhaps more importantly, it's a bit unfair to call the JP people on it when it was perfectly legitimate to have bipedal running hadrosaurs in the 1990s. I think the page should stick to things that were known to be inaccurate or questionable at the time of production, like sizes and creative embellishments (intelligence, pretty much anything to do with Dilophosaurus, etc.). J. Spencer (talk) 04:39, 7 January 2010 (UTC)
Service awards proposal
Hello, J. Spencer/Archive 3! I noticed you display a service award, and would like to invite you to join the discussion over a proposed revamping of the awards. If you have any opinions on the proposal, please participate in the discussion. Thanks! — the Man in Question (in question) 04:14, 8 January 2010 (UTC)
Kinkonychelys.
- Thank you very much! Oh no! It's not here!!! (talk) 08:00, 12 January 2010 (UTC)
- Hi again! Following your suggestions, I've gotten the page's main content up to 1227 characters, but of course, it still falls short of the DYK requirement by nearly 300 characters. The only information I can see in the paper about the genus that can still be included is the physical descriptions of the different specimens, and personal experience tells me I'm not too handy when it comes to understanding all of the scientific words used in these descriptions. I really want this article to become a DYK article, though, and I've already seen a few facts in what's been included that might "impress the judges" substantially for inclusion in a DYK update. If it's no trouble, and if any of that information is notable for inclusion in the article, could you please help with adding it in? That would be very much appreciated! Oh no! It's not here!!! (talk) 09:58, 12 January 2010 (UTC)
- Thanks again! Oh no! It's not here!!! (talk) 23:05, 12 January 2010 (UTC)
- Thanks a million, J. Spencer!!! Oh no! It's not here!!! (talk) 00:27, 13 January 2010 (UTC)
- Thanks again! Oh no! It's not here!!! (talk) 23:05, 12 January 2010 (UTC)
- Hi again! Following your suggestions, I've gotten the page's main content up to 1227 characters, but of course, it still falls short of the DYK requirement by nearly 300 characters. The only information I can see in the paper about the genus that can still be included is the physical descriptions of the different specimens, and personal experience tells me I'm not too handy when it comes to understanding all of the scientific words used in these descriptions. I really want this article to become a DYK article, though, and I've already seen a few facts in what's been included that might "impress the judges" substantially for inclusion in a DYK update. If it's no trouble, and if any of that information is notable for inclusion in the article, could you please help with adding it in? That would be very much appreciated! Oh no! It's not here!!! (talk) 09:58, 12 January 2010 (UTC)
Talk:Dinosaur archiving
Deinonychus
- Thank you! I'm not actually very familiar with IPA, but people who are set up the templates on the dinosaur articles, and since this one's been stable for a long time, I figured it was probably a gag or a test edit. J. Spencer (talk) 00:50, 21 January 2010 (UTC)
- I cannot read IPA either - I merely "sounded it out", as you might phrase it. ;) -RadicalOne•Contact Me•Chase My Tail 02:44, 21 January 2010 (UTC)
WikiProject Dinosaurs in the Signpost
Redirects and categories
- Well, it doesn't really bother me either way; it just looked funny having it on a redirect. Species of Psittacosaurus
- I added comments o how to improve the article. GamerPro64 (talk) 01:59, 5 February 2010 (UTC)]
- I sorry to bother you but did you have me give suggestions to improve the article so you can improve the it or for someone else who would want to? GamerPro64 (talk) 23:18, 6 February 2010 (UTC).
- Thank you, J. Spencer!!! Oh no! It's not here!!! (talk) 23:39, 7 February 2010 (UTC)
Reply
Rhabdognathus.
- Okay then. Thank you for the links! Oh no! It's not here!!! (talk) 07:25, 2 March 2010 (UTC)
Linheraptor.
- Thanks! Oh no! It's not here!!! (talk) 02:31, 21 March 2010 (UTC)
Guanlong imageHello, I've uploaded some images yesterday and put them with some articles. You said that my images weren't the kind that you're looking for. Is this one a bit better?
Guanlong wucaii Kind regards from 82.169.6.135 (talk) 13:45, 1 April 2010 (UTC) or better known as Joerim on the Dutch Wikipedia.
Welcome back
Re: Penghusuchus
Brachi and Giraffatitan
- I am torn between keeping a tidy list at the bottom and placing them at first use. I guess the latter is simply more common, and also easier to work with once the text doesn't change much anymore. However, writing the Plateosaurus article showed me that for a total re-write a list at the end would have been better - I spent lots of time searching through the editor. So I guess I'll keep the alphabetical list, and once the text is ready for the main page I'll place the citation at the first use. HMallison (talk) 06:08, 12 May 2010 (UTC)
You're quite right to prod me - however, I must point to the sauropoda re-write, which is devloping into a physiology of dinosaurs update.... I had some rough weeks, work and kids' health wise, but hope to contribute the missing data within the next few days. Then the text will need a thorough massage - was that you vounteering??? ;) HMallison (talk) 06:45, 15 June 2010 (UTC)
- Give me a day or two more, and I'll have a rough structure ready. Then we should talk about it - may or may not be best to use your structure. HMallison (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 15:57, 16 June 2010 (UTC).
If you're into sauropods....here's a must read for you :) Long, boring, but a "deal-breaker", 'cause it has all you ever need to know and cite (I hope). http://www3.interscience.wiley.com/cgi-bin/fulltext/123397084/HTMLSTART PDF here: http://www3.interscience.wiley.com/cgi-bin/fulltext/123397084/PDFSTART HMallison (talk) 23:35, 16 May 2010 (UTC)
- well, it took me three years to understand it all - but that did involve the research, too ;) Aachenosaurus
- well, it took me three years to understand it all - but that did involve the research, too ;)
- Dunno. I've gone ahead and semi-protected for a month. We'll see if it deters this fellow or fellows. Only the pages listed at Wikipedia:Pending changes/Testing are to be flagged for pending changes. Firsfron of Ronchester 04:10, 9 July 2010 (UTC)
Family treeHi, I'm from the Dutch Wikipedia. Because I want an article to be finished tommorow (I'm going on holliday) I needed help from someone quikly, so I come to you. Maybe you still know me from the illustration of the Guanlong. Here's the problem:
<font color="white">unnamed <font color="white">unnamed <font color="white">unnamed Champsosauridae<font color="white">unnamed familie Simoedosauridae<font color="white">unnamed ?
ChampsosauridaeI've got two family trees. The upper one is good, but in front of it there has to be "familie Simoedosauridae", like with the second one. Can you help me, please? Kind regards from 82.169.6.135 (talk) 19:48, 14 July 2010 (UTC) or Joerim, as I'm known at the Dutch Wikipedia.
- Thank you very much! Only one thing, what mistake did I make when making one of these family trees? Kind regards from 82.169.6.135 (talk) 07:35, 15 July 2010 (UTC) or Joerim
Talkback
Concavenator imageHi, I uploaded an image to Concavenator but it was removed due to it not being anatomically rigorous. I did a new one, which is here http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Conc2.png I used this image http://images.nationalgeographic.com/wpf/media-live/photos/000/257/cache/humpback-dinosaur-life-reconstruction_25710_600x450.jpg as a model, but I don't know if mine is yet fit to be used in the article. Any help on how are images judged would be very appreciated (I also posted all this on the article's talk page but I don't know if it will get much attention there).
thank you very much Nestor db (talk) 18:44, 10 September 2010 (UTC)
Parks ref
- I sorry to bother you but did you have me give suggestions to improve the article so you can improve the it or for someone else who would want to?
- P.S. Also, I'd like to make sure I interpreted everything I've included in the article correctly. Thanks in advance! Mess around with the guy in shades all you like - don't mess around with the girl in gloves! (talk) 08:28, 26 June 2009 (UTC)
