This article is within the scope of WikiProject Dinosaurs, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of dinosaurs and dinosaur-related topics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.DinosaursWikipedia:WikiProject DinosaursTemplate:WikiProject Dinosaursdinosaurs articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Palaeontology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of palaeontology-related topics and create a standardized, informative, comprehensive and easy-to-use resource on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PalaeontologyWikipedia:WikiProject PalaeontologyTemplate:WikiProject PalaeontologyPalaeontology articles
The Paris pictures are apparently those of the remains found in 1955 at Argences by Roger Brun, which until 2005 were present at the Le Havre museum.--MWAK (talk) 09:45, 3 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
So they may rather belong in Loricatosaurus? FunkMonk (talk) 10:56, 3 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Well...they could obviously be used to illustrate the Loricatosaurus article. However, many researchers see no need for a split and keep using Lexovisaurus as a name for the entirety of the British and French material. As they would form an illustration of this fact, the images have their rightful place in the Lexovisaurus article also. BTW, my congratulations with the "Dutch Pigeon" article :o)!--MWAK (talk) 14:01, 3 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Ok, I'll add the images there too. And thanks, heheh, perhaps you know the answer to this?[1]FunkMonk (talk) 14:46, 3 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
