Talk:Dinosaur

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Dinosaur article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Archives: Index, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15: 30 days

Template:Vital article

Dinosaur is a featured article; it (or a previous version of it) has been identified as one of the best articles produced by the Wikipedia community. Even so, if you can update or improve it, please do so.

This article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page as Today's featured article on January 1, 2006.

Article milestones
Date	Process	Result
October 11, 2005	Featured article candidate	Not promoted
December 17, 2005	Featured article candidate	Promoted

Current status: Featured article

This article has not yet been rated on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
It is of interest to multiple WikiProjects.

Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.

Dinosaurs Top‑importance

	Dinosaurs portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Dinosaurs, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of dinosaurs and dinosaur-related topics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.DinosaursWikipedia:WikiProject DinosaursTemplate:WikiProject Dinosaursdinosaurs
Top	This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.

Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.

Palaeontology Top‑importance

	Paleontology portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Palaeontology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of palaeontology-related topics and create a standardized, informative, comprehensive and easy-to-use resource on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PalaeontologyWikipedia:WikiProject PalaeontologyTemplate:WikiProject PalaeontologyPalaeontology
Top	This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.

Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.

Amphibians and Reptiles Top‑importance

	Dinosaur is part of WikiProject Amphibians and Reptiles, an effort to make Wikipedia a standardized, informative, comprehensive and easy-to-use resource for amphibians and reptiles. If you would like to participate, you can choose to edit this article, or visit the project page for more information.Amphibians and ReptilesWikipedia:WikiProject Amphibians and ReptilesTemplate:WikiProject Amphibians and Reptilesamphibian and reptile
Top	This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.

Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.

Tree of Life High‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Tree of Life, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of taxonomy and the phylogenetic tree of life on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Tree of LifeWikipedia:WikiProject Tree of LifeTemplate:WikiProject Tree of Lifetaxonomic
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Template:WP1.0

Spoken Wikipedia

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Spoken Wikipedia, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles that are spoken on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Spoken WikipediaWikipedia:WikiProject Spoken WikipediaTemplate:WikiProject Spoken WikipediaSpoken Wikipedia

Template:Past cotw

Iguanodon discovery inconsistency

This relates to the "History of Study" section. This section states that the wife of Gideon Mantell discovered the first Iguanodon fossils. However, the article on "Iguanodon" states that Gideon himself discovered the fossils, and the story of his wife finding the fossils is a "legend".

Zdorovo (talk) 06:35, 1 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Temporal range should be changed.

The temporal range currently says Late Triassic-Holocene (referring to birds) the problem with this is that it implies Dinosaurs went extinct in the current time period the Holocene so I think it would make sense if it said Late Triassic-present because saying Holocene implies their extinction in that time period. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2605:A000:D141:3800:5508:4DFC:D7A0:FA00 (talk) 18:24, 1 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I agree. Abyssal (talk) 19:54, 1 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

It really should say Late Triassic to Late Cretaceous as birds are not dinosaurs — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sksksksksksksksk (talk • contribs) 16:03, 4 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Except they are. 2600:100C:B229:5E54:0:21:ADDC:CE01 (talk) 23:43, 4 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I made the suggested change, though the same issue is present on several other pages, especially as there is depate about wether the Holocene has ended and the Anthropocene has begun, I think this is a valid move. ((PS: Birds are therapod dinosaurs, at this point that is pretty much certain ))Stefanpw (talk) 22:41, 12 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Extinction of dinosaours

How about the last study that dinosours bones actually have collagen remains on their bones, if this is true they did not become extinct before 60 million years--Evropariver (talk) 09:38, 14 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

No, if this is true it means collagen can survive in conditions we previously thought it couldn't. Dinoguy2 (talk) 11:20, 14 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Unbiased?

Wikipedia is supposed to be unbiased. Let's try not to push evolution and not even mention creation. It is biased to hold evolution as the only truth and not give any leverage (for a lack of better words, would support be a better word?) to creationism. I read that our articles need to be unbiased and factual. We shouldn't lean towards one idea and not explain the other ideas. You may say that we have an article on creationism, but our readers need to know all views when they read something that would normally support one idea. Christian Sirolli (talk) 20:25, 11 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

We push observable facts like the theory of evolution because encyclopedias are supposed to inform people of facts. And yes, evolution, despite the rantings of some prominent creationists, has been observed and recreated in a lab. I've even got proof of it in a box under my bed. Sorry you were misinformed.Farsight001 (talk) 22:12, 11 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, but, no. Encyclopedia readers do not NEED to know all views when they read something: The earth article does not need to state that some people think the earth is flat, the lightning article does not need to include information on Thor or Zeus. Evolution occurs, this is a fact, and it is not biased to include facts and leave out supernatural explanations. Stefanpw (talk) 22:41, 12 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]