This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Leedsichthys article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
![]() | This ![]() It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||
|
![]() | This article links to one or more target anchors that no longer exist.
Please help fix the broken anchors. You can remove this template after fixing the problems. |
Reporting errors |
Here's a link with more realistic size estimates and comments concerning higher claims. It's true size was 12.6–16.9 m (41¼–55½ ft) in length – including the "22 metre" 2002 Peterborough specimen. This is quite close to modern estimates of the length of Carcharocles megalodon, and since I haven't seen any weight estimates for Leedsichthys, I'm not that sure which was the largest fish that has ever lived. Both exceeded the maximum length (12.65 m/41 ft 6 in) of the Whale Shark, the largest extant fish species. For certain Leedsichthys was the largest known bony fish of all time. -- Anshelm '77 19:34, 5 March 2007 (UTC)
Lol, so the BBC super sized not only Liopleurodon, but Leedsichthys too. The message is clear: never listen to the BBC! Spinodontosaurus ( talk) 20:30, 1 December 2009 (UTC)
Is the ammonite in the picture really in the background? I don't know how big an ammonite was, but judging by the size of L. problematicus, I'm beginning to wonder if it is in fact in the foreground for scale. Bob the Wikipedian, the Tree of Life WikiDragon ( talk) 01:07, 29 April 2008 (UTC)
For more on this matter, see this on the talk page for Bowfin. • Rabo³ • 11:18, 30 July 2008 (UTC)
I made a minor edit and changed: "Like the largest fish today, the whale and basking sharks..." to "Like the largest fish today, the whale sharks and basking sharks..." Maybe it's just because I'm not very bright, but the first time I read it, I read it as calling whales fish. The link and, well, thinking, cleared this up, but I thought the clarification might be nice for fellow readers who haven't had any coffee yet. 66.77.144.5 ( talk) 18:47, 26 September 2008 (UTC)
As pointed out in the article here [2], the recons in this article are pretty inaccurate. Removing them for now, not sure if they can be modified. Dinoguy2 ( talk) 17:16, 2 July 2009 (UTC)
The original text read: "There is little direct evidence for predation as opposed to scavenging on Leedsichthys remains, but specimen P.6924 in the Natural History Museum of London shows signs of bites from a Liopleurodon-sized pliosaur. These bites have then healed, indicating that Leedsichthys could even escape the top predator of the Oxford Clay seas, probably as a result of its powerful tail". I have no access to the Martill 1986 article and so am unable to check whether this claim in fact refers to the Metriorhynchus tooth. I have found no further reference to pliosaurid biting-marks. Should anyone be able to clear this up, I would be much obliged!-- MWAK ( talk) 08:39, 7 August 2013 (UTC)
How heavy was Leedsichthys? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 112.134.147.242 ( talk) 10:17, 20 June 2014 (UTC)
Not sure how much of this is already incorporated. So here it is. Also note the nice life recon we could use as a link here. -- Pete Tillman ( talk) 21:38, 1 June 2018 (UTC)
Did these fish taste good? I would like to try one batter dipped and fried with chips.
-- 2600:1700:B450:7500:E97B:85B5:2008:DE6E ( talk) 10:29, 24 January 2021 (UTC)
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Leedsichthys article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
![]() | This ![]() It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||
|
![]() | This article links to one or more target anchors that no longer exist.
Please help fix the broken anchors. You can remove this template after fixing the problems. |
Reporting errors |
Here's a link with more realistic size estimates and comments concerning higher claims. It's true size was 12.6–16.9 m (41¼–55½ ft) in length – including the "22 metre" 2002 Peterborough specimen. This is quite close to modern estimates of the length of Carcharocles megalodon, and since I haven't seen any weight estimates for Leedsichthys, I'm not that sure which was the largest fish that has ever lived. Both exceeded the maximum length (12.65 m/41 ft 6 in) of the Whale Shark, the largest extant fish species. For certain Leedsichthys was the largest known bony fish of all time. -- Anshelm '77 19:34, 5 March 2007 (UTC)
Lol, so the BBC super sized not only Liopleurodon, but Leedsichthys too. The message is clear: never listen to the BBC! Spinodontosaurus ( talk) 20:30, 1 December 2009 (UTC)
Is the ammonite in the picture really in the background? I don't know how big an ammonite was, but judging by the size of L. problematicus, I'm beginning to wonder if it is in fact in the foreground for scale. Bob the Wikipedian, the Tree of Life WikiDragon ( talk) 01:07, 29 April 2008 (UTC)
For more on this matter, see this on the talk page for Bowfin. • Rabo³ • 11:18, 30 July 2008 (UTC)
I made a minor edit and changed: "Like the largest fish today, the whale and basking sharks..." to "Like the largest fish today, the whale sharks and basking sharks..." Maybe it's just because I'm not very bright, but the first time I read it, I read it as calling whales fish. The link and, well, thinking, cleared this up, but I thought the clarification might be nice for fellow readers who haven't had any coffee yet. 66.77.144.5 ( talk) 18:47, 26 September 2008 (UTC)
As pointed out in the article here [2], the recons in this article are pretty inaccurate. Removing them for now, not sure if they can be modified. Dinoguy2 ( talk) 17:16, 2 July 2009 (UTC)
The original text read: "There is little direct evidence for predation as opposed to scavenging on Leedsichthys remains, but specimen P.6924 in the Natural History Museum of London shows signs of bites from a Liopleurodon-sized pliosaur. These bites have then healed, indicating that Leedsichthys could even escape the top predator of the Oxford Clay seas, probably as a result of its powerful tail". I have no access to the Martill 1986 article and so am unable to check whether this claim in fact refers to the Metriorhynchus tooth. I have found no further reference to pliosaurid biting-marks. Should anyone be able to clear this up, I would be much obliged!-- MWAK ( talk) 08:39, 7 August 2013 (UTC)
How heavy was Leedsichthys? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 112.134.147.242 ( talk) 10:17, 20 June 2014 (UTC)
Not sure how much of this is already incorporated. So here it is. Also note the nice life recon we could use as a link here. -- Pete Tillman ( talk) 21:38, 1 June 2018 (UTC)
Did these fish taste good? I would like to try one batter dipped and fried with chips.
-- 2600:1700:B450:7500:E97B:85B5:2008:DE6E ( talk) 10:29, 24 January 2021 (UTC)