![]() | This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||
|
I still think a family page needs detailed information on its members. Lets consider grouping the species (by age, location, or common characteristics) or discussing them in some fashion outside the species box. The material below taken from a previous edit. WBardwin 02:47, 7 May 2005 (UTC)
The following are species which have been placed in this group.
-- MWAK 08:09, 8 May 2005 (UTC)
So, what if we did something like this??? WBardwin 22:46, 8 May 2005 (UTC)
THERIZINOSAURIA |-Falcarius |-Beipiaosaurus | |-Therizinosauroidea ("true" therizinosaurs) |-Alxasauridae | |-Alxasaurus | |-Neimongosauridae (unofficial clade) | |-Neimongosaurus | |-Therizinosauridae (ischium in direct contact with pubis) |-Nanshiungosaurus |-Nothronychus |-Segnosaurus |-Therizinosaurus |-Chilantaisaurus |-UNNAMED CLADE (ischium fused to pubis) | |-Enigmosaurus | |-Erlikosaurus (*=no pelvis known for this species) |-Nanshiungosaurus (spoonshaped ischium & fused cervical vertebrae)
Well, again there are a few problems. :o) Firstly, as a encyclopedia we can only follow analyses of others. Creating cladograms of our own constitutes the notorious wikicrime of Original Research. Secondly, the analyses are in constant flux. E.g. Mortimer last week on the DML gave the following analysis of the phylogenetic setting of Falcarius:
- +--Protarchaeopteryx `--+--Falcarius `--+--+--IVPP V11309 | `--+--Beipiaosaurus | `--Nothronychus `--+--Alxasaurus `--+--Nanshiungosaurus `--+--+--Neimongosaurus | `--Erlianosaurus `--+--Erlikosaurus `--Segnosaurus
Not too different from yours and his project is far from finished, but it shows we can on wikipedia give either only the vaguest outlines abstaining from too much detail, or all analyses and clade definitions.
Thirdly, your cladogram seems to be purely based on some "key" synapomorphies. That's a very dangerous method, today abandoned by serious cladistics. Of course twenty years ago it was considered state-of-the-art science. But the times have changed (though some have refused to change with them ;o). Besides many of the characters you use are caused by bone fusion, a phenomenon that's age and size-related and might well reflect individual variability instead of species variation.
-- MWAK 09:13, 9 May 2005 (UTC)
Therizinosauroidea | `--+--Falcarius `--+--Beipiaosaurus `--Therizinosauridae
-- MWAK 07:19, 10 May 2005 (UTC)
-- MWAK 09:06, 11 May 2005 (UTC)
I still support merging the higher-level therizinosaur taxa into one page, as we used to have for Tyrannosaur until we developed enough information to split them. This is actually a wiki guideline--it's better to have one page covering closely related subjects than a few closely related stubs. Dinoguy2 13:08, 15 May 2006 (UTC)
I'm looking at an old dinosaur reference (it's dated at 1989), and it gives a picture of the Segnosaurus hip girdle, while, while it shares a small number of similarities with both ornithischian and saurischian hip girdles, sets itself quite apart from them (thus the reason for the creation of the Segnosauria infraorder in the past). Is this hip girdle common across all therizinosaurs? I could provide a scan if you so desire. -- JB Adder | Talk 14:49, 19 October 2006 (UTC)
Add Inosaurus to the Therizinosauria page. The placement of Therizinosauria follows http://staff.washington.edu/eoraptor/Therizinosauroidea.htm. Inosaurus, if a therizinosaur, represents the first record of Therizinosauria from Africa.
Since "segnosaurs" were frequently depicted this way until recently, wouldn't it be cool to include this image to show and example of the more prosauropod like reconstructions? With a good caption of course, it's similar to having the old Iguanodon illustrations, yet even more interesting, since this was a belief held until quite recently. Could be cool to have it below the modern skeletal for contrast. FunkMonk ( talk) 13:55, 14 September 2008 (UTC)
This article incorrectly states that maniraptorans were omnivorous. While therizinosaurs were omnivorous, there were many other groups of maniraptorans, such as dromaeosaurs and present-day birds of prey, that were purely carnivorous. Just because this article is about therizinosaurs doesn't mean they have to lump the dietary habits of every maniraptoran group into those of therizinosaurs. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.36.130.109 ( talk) 02:03, 14 March 2012 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Therizinosaur. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 00:18, 13 January 2018 (UTC)
![]() | This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||
|
I still think a family page needs detailed information on its members. Lets consider grouping the species (by age, location, or common characteristics) or discussing them in some fashion outside the species box. The material below taken from a previous edit. WBardwin 02:47, 7 May 2005 (UTC)
The following are species which have been placed in this group.
-- MWAK 08:09, 8 May 2005 (UTC)
So, what if we did something like this??? WBardwin 22:46, 8 May 2005 (UTC)
THERIZINOSAURIA |-Falcarius |-Beipiaosaurus | |-Therizinosauroidea ("true" therizinosaurs) |-Alxasauridae | |-Alxasaurus | |-Neimongosauridae (unofficial clade) | |-Neimongosaurus | |-Therizinosauridae (ischium in direct contact with pubis) |-Nanshiungosaurus |-Nothronychus |-Segnosaurus |-Therizinosaurus |-Chilantaisaurus |-UNNAMED CLADE (ischium fused to pubis) | |-Enigmosaurus | |-Erlikosaurus (*=no pelvis known for this species) |-Nanshiungosaurus (spoonshaped ischium & fused cervical vertebrae)
Well, again there are a few problems. :o) Firstly, as a encyclopedia we can only follow analyses of others. Creating cladograms of our own constitutes the notorious wikicrime of Original Research. Secondly, the analyses are in constant flux. E.g. Mortimer last week on the DML gave the following analysis of the phylogenetic setting of Falcarius:
- +--Protarchaeopteryx `--+--Falcarius `--+--+--IVPP V11309 | `--+--Beipiaosaurus | `--Nothronychus `--+--Alxasaurus `--+--Nanshiungosaurus `--+--+--Neimongosaurus | `--Erlianosaurus `--+--Erlikosaurus `--Segnosaurus
Not too different from yours and his project is far from finished, but it shows we can on wikipedia give either only the vaguest outlines abstaining from too much detail, or all analyses and clade definitions.
Thirdly, your cladogram seems to be purely based on some "key" synapomorphies. That's a very dangerous method, today abandoned by serious cladistics. Of course twenty years ago it was considered state-of-the-art science. But the times have changed (though some have refused to change with them ;o). Besides many of the characters you use are caused by bone fusion, a phenomenon that's age and size-related and might well reflect individual variability instead of species variation.
-- MWAK 09:13, 9 May 2005 (UTC)
Therizinosauroidea | `--+--Falcarius `--+--Beipiaosaurus `--Therizinosauridae
-- MWAK 07:19, 10 May 2005 (UTC)
-- MWAK 09:06, 11 May 2005 (UTC)
I still support merging the higher-level therizinosaur taxa into one page, as we used to have for Tyrannosaur until we developed enough information to split them. This is actually a wiki guideline--it's better to have one page covering closely related subjects than a few closely related stubs. Dinoguy2 13:08, 15 May 2006 (UTC)
I'm looking at an old dinosaur reference (it's dated at 1989), and it gives a picture of the Segnosaurus hip girdle, while, while it shares a small number of similarities with both ornithischian and saurischian hip girdles, sets itself quite apart from them (thus the reason for the creation of the Segnosauria infraorder in the past). Is this hip girdle common across all therizinosaurs? I could provide a scan if you so desire. -- JB Adder | Talk 14:49, 19 October 2006 (UTC)
Add Inosaurus to the Therizinosauria page. The placement of Therizinosauria follows http://staff.washington.edu/eoraptor/Therizinosauroidea.htm. Inosaurus, if a therizinosaur, represents the first record of Therizinosauria from Africa.
Since "segnosaurs" were frequently depicted this way until recently, wouldn't it be cool to include this image to show and example of the more prosauropod like reconstructions? With a good caption of course, it's similar to having the old Iguanodon illustrations, yet even more interesting, since this was a belief held until quite recently. Could be cool to have it below the modern skeletal for contrast. FunkMonk ( talk) 13:55, 14 September 2008 (UTC)
This article incorrectly states that maniraptorans were omnivorous. While therizinosaurs were omnivorous, there were many other groups of maniraptorans, such as dromaeosaurs and present-day birds of prey, that were purely carnivorous. Just because this article is about therizinosaurs doesn't mean they have to lump the dietary habits of every maniraptoran group into those of therizinosaurs. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.36.130.109 ( talk) 02:03, 14 March 2012 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Therizinosaur. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 00:18, 13 January 2018 (UTC)