This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Liopleurodon 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 |
Archives: 1 |
![]() | Please stay calm and civil while commenting or presenting evidence, and do not make personal attacks. Be patient when approaching solutions to any issues. If consensus is not reached, other solutions exist to draw attention and ensure that more editors mediate or comment on the dispute. |
![]() | Liopleurodon received a peer review by Wikipedia editors, which is now archived. It may contain ideas you can use to improve this article. |
![]() | This ![]() It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||
|
I think that tidbit needs just a little more elaboration, due to the common misconception that the great size was based on "The Monster of Aramberri". It's stated in the tie-in book Walking with Dinosaurs The Evidence on page 80 that the gigantic Liopleurodon was based on a large pliosaur vertebra from Oxford Clay described by David Martill and Collin McHenry in 1996 ( https://archive.org/details/walkingwithdinos00mart/page/104/mode/2up) which was initially thought to have come from a pliosaur 17-20 meters in length ( https://reptilis.net/DML/1996Oct/msg00231.html), and for WWD, they speculated based on those estimates that even larger specimens could have existed, leading to the 25-meter Liopleurodon in "Cruel Sea".
In 2009, Colin McHenry reexamined the ‘Peterborough vertebra’ (PETMG R272) in his lengthy paper "Devourer of Gods" and gave it a smaller estimate of 11.6–14.2 meters (mean estimate, 12.6 m) on page 437 and cautioned how unreliable size estimates based on fragmentary material can be. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 109.228.107.227 ( talk) 12:43, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
How is it that the word "extinct" doesn't appear anywhere in the article except as part of the title of a footnote? I realize it's WP policy to use the present tense "is" in describing what an item is (not sure where "was" comes in), but from what I gather, no Liopeurodons are living in the present day. Manys ( talk) 00:21, 11 January 2021 (UTC)
This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 6 September 2020 and 7 December 2020. Further details are available
on the course page. Student editor(s):
ShawnBoom.
Above undated message substituted from
Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by
PrimeBOT (
talk)
02:38, 17 January 2022 (UTC)
One is featured in PRIMAL S1E10. Drsruli ( talk) 04:49, 25 July 2022 (UTC)
I had thought that there was a popular culture section for this article. I'll leave this suggestion for such time as one may be added. Drsruli ( talk) 05:48, 9 August 2022 (UTC)
More than any other single item currently listed in the category on this article, absolutely, without a doubt. (And in an absolute sense, yes, of course it was important in that episode.) Drsruli ( talk) 01:33, 13 August 2022 (UTC)
"While fishing, Spear and Fang encounter a bound and bald-headed tall woman with a scorpion tattoo on the back of her head fleeing from a Liopleurodon which Spear kills." The animal is directly involved in the plot. Not a main character, but the focus of attention for about a minute. It also fights with the tyrannosaur. The animal is easily recognizable as a Liopleurodon. Drsruli ( talk) 01:18, 15 August 2022 (UTC)
It seems to me that fiction and nonfiction representations shouldn't be compared. Is there a fiction film or TV where a Liopleurodon plays a larger part? (There probably is, though, right?) Drsruli ( talk) 04:53, 15 August 2022 (UTC)
As far as the first point, it is identified as Liopleurodon in the secondary sources. (And within the show, it's depicted clearly enough, that it could not be confused with another genus.) Drsruli ( talk) 16:54, 7 September 2022 (UTC)
Sorry, it could be confused for those (or by the right observer, for anything). (A hyperbolic statement of original research on my part.) Nevertheless, it has been identified as Liopleurodon. Drsruli ( talk) 05:18, 10 September 2022 (UTC)
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Liopleurodon 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 |
Archives: 1 |
![]() | Please stay calm and civil while commenting or presenting evidence, and do not make personal attacks. Be patient when approaching solutions to any issues. If consensus is not reached, other solutions exist to draw attention and ensure that more editors mediate or comment on the dispute. |
![]() | Liopleurodon received a peer review by Wikipedia editors, which is now archived. It may contain ideas you can use to improve this article. |
![]() | This ![]() It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||
|
I think that tidbit needs just a little more elaboration, due to the common misconception that the great size was based on "The Monster of Aramberri". It's stated in the tie-in book Walking with Dinosaurs The Evidence on page 80 that the gigantic Liopleurodon was based on a large pliosaur vertebra from Oxford Clay described by David Martill and Collin McHenry in 1996 ( https://archive.org/details/walkingwithdinos00mart/page/104/mode/2up) which was initially thought to have come from a pliosaur 17-20 meters in length ( https://reptilis.net/DML/1996Oct/msg00231.html), and for WWD, they speculated based on those estimates that even larger specimens could have existed, leading to the 25-meter Liopleurodon in "Cruel Sea".
In 2009, Colin McHenry reexamined the ‘Peterborough vertebra’ (PETMG R272) in his lengthy paper "Devourer of Gods" and gave it a smaller estimate of 11.6–14.2 meters (mean estimate, 12.6 m) on page 437 and cautioned how unreliable size estimates based on fragmentary material can be. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 109.228.107.227 ( talk) 12:43, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
How is it that the word "extinct" doesn't appear anywhere in the article except as part of the title of a footnote? I realize it's WP policy to use the present tense "is" in describing what an item is (not sure where "was" comes in), but from what I gather, no Liopeurodons are living in the present day. Manys ( talk) 00:21, 11 January 2021 (UTC)
This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 6 September 2020 and 7 December 2020. Further details are available
on the course page. Student editor(s):
ShawnBoom.
Above undated message substituted from
Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by
PrimeBOT (
talk)
02:38, 17 January 2022 (UTC)
One is featured in PRIMAL S1E10. Drsruli ( talk) 04:49, 25 July 2022 (UTC)
I had thought that there was a popular culture section for this article. I'll leave this suggestion for such time as one may be added. Drsruli ( talk) 05:48, 9 August 2022 (UTC)
More than any other single item currently listed in the category on this article, absolutely, without a doubt. (And in an absolute sense, yes, of course it was important in that episode.) Drsruli ( talk) 01:33, 13 August 2022 (UTC)
"While fishing, Spear and Fang encounter a bound and bald-headed tall woman with a scorpion tattoo on the back of her head fleeing from a Liopleurodon which Spear kills." The animal is directly involved in the plot. Not a main character, but the focus of attention for about a minute. It also fights with the tyrannosaur. The animal is easily recognizable as a Liopleurodon. Drsruli ( talk) 01:18, 15 August 2022 (UTC)
It seems to me that fiction and nonfiction representations shouldn't be compared. Is there a fiction film or TV where a Liopleurodon plays a larger part? (There probably is, though, right?) Drsruli ( talk) 04:53, 15 August 2022 (UTC)
As far as the first point, it is identified as Liopleurodon in the secondary sources. (And within the show, it's depicted clearly enough, that it could not be confused with another genus.) Drsruli ( talk) 16:54, 7 September 2022 (UTC)
Sorry, it could be confused for those (or by the right observer, for anything). (A hyperbolic statement of original research on my part.) Nevertheless, it has been identified as Liopleurodon. Drsruli ( talk) 05:18, 10 September 2022 (UTC)