Talk:Megaraptor: Difference between revisions
m Signing comment by 142.176.114.76 - "→Spinosauroids: new section" |
|||
Line 30: | Line 30: | ||
In the article it says spinosauroids, when meglosauroids is the correct term. <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">— Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/142.176.114.76|142.176.114.76]] ([[User talk:142.176.114.76|talk]]) 01:23, 5 November 2013 (UTC)</span><!-- Template:Unsigned IP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> |
In the article it says spinosauroids, when meglosauroids is the correct term. <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">— Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/142.176.114.76|142.176.114.76]] ([[User talk:142.176.114.76|talk]]) 01:23, 5 November 2013 (UTC)</span><!-- Template:Unsigned IP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> |
||
''Spinosauroidea'' is a synonym of ''Megalosauroidea'', so its not incorrect ''per se'' but its being used to refer to spinosaurs specifically. as opposed to other megalosaurs.--[[Special:Contributions/50.195.51.9|50.195.51.9]] ([[User talk:50.195.51.9|talk]]) 17:40, 22 November 2013 (UTC) |
Revision as of 17:40, 22 November 2013
{{WikiProject banner shell}}
to this page and add the quality rating to that template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.![]() | Geology Start‑class Mid‑importance | |||||||||
|
{{WikiProject banner shell}}
to this page and add the quality rating to that template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.![]() | Dinosaurs Start‑class | |||||||||
|
Megaraptor, spinosaurid or noasaurid?
I personally have seen a lot of information showing that Megaraptor might actually be a noasaurid abelisaur. For example, Noasaurus had a similar claw on the hand. But, somewhere, I saw someone say that Megaraptor was the last of the spinosaurs. What is going on? Metalraptor (talk) 14:22, 8 May 2008 (UTC)
- Nobody knows what it is, but most things I've seen suggest a tetanuran. That would rule out noasaurs, and leave it either as a spinosauroid or allosauroid. Dinoguy2 (talk) 23:58, 8 May 2008 (UTC)
I think Megaraptor is more likely a Spinosaurid, even without sail. Shadowrend45, 19:04, November 1 2012 (UTC)
- More recent studies have shown that it was actually a neovenatorid, a relative or descendant of the carcharodontosaurs. MMartyniuk (talk) 20:17, 1 November 2012 (UTC)
Giant Noasaur
Deltadromeus is gigantic and the biggest of the noasaurs, it is 9 meters long. Megaraptor is more or less the same size (8 - 9 meters), as you know, 90% of noasaurs and abelisaurs were from South America. So, if abelisaurs had puny arms, and noasaurs had long, grasping arms, then Megaraptor might be a big noasaur.
Part 2:
The Megaraptor-related dinosaur found in Australia has not yet been described, but in my opinion it is probably a new dwarf species of Megaraptor, which if Megaraptor was a noasaur, the dwarf Megaraptor would be the first abelisauroid found in Australia, and one of the strange dinosaurs which are found in Australia. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.251.58.222 (talk) 09:15, 8 November 2009 (UTC)
- Seems like you missed this: Neovenatoridae FunkMonk (talk) 09:25, 8 November 2009 (UTC)
Dates
The article states that Megaraptor was described in 1998, but yet I have seen it identified by its proper name on a 1997 episode of Paleoworld. How is this possible? 70.80.215.121 (talk) 20:31, 14 May 2011 (UTC)Adam70.80.215.121 (talk) 20:31, 14 May 2011 (UTC)
- Occasionally, the unpublished name for an animal gets into the media before it is actually scientifically published. This is one way that nomina nuda, or "naked names", are introduced. Usually this happens a few days in advance of a publication, but sometimes there are longer gaps (such as if someone in the production assumed the name would be already published, but then the manuscript required more time). I think the same thing happened for Gastonia in Paleoworld, although to be fair I think its name was floating around for a few years before it was officially published. J. Spencer (talk) 03:32, 15 May 2011 (UTC)
- The name did indeed appear as a nomen nudum in at least 1997 according to this: [1] The animal was first announced but not described as early as 1996 and presumably they thought of a name pretty quickly after that. MMartyniuk (talk) 13:22, 16 May 2011 (UTC)
Spinosauroids
In the article it says spinosauroids, when meglosauroids is the correct term. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 142.176.114.76 (talk) 01:23, 5 November 2013 (UTC)
Spinosauroidea is a synonym of Megalosauroidea, so its not incorrect per se but its being used to refer to spinosaurs specifically. as opposed to other megalosaurs.--50.195.51.9 (talk) 17:40, 22 November 2013 (UTC)