![]() | This article is written in American English, which has its own spelling conventions (color, defense, traveled) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus. |
![]() | This ![]() It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
There was a lot of conjecture and simply false statements on this page. To begin with, "reasonable to assume that this trait was present in all of Dromaeosauridae" in reference to feathers is false. The same way you don't look at a woolly mammoth and presume all other elephants were covered in hair.
"Feathers were very unlikely to have evolved more than once, so assuming that any given dromaeosaurid, such as Utahraptor, lacked feathers would require positive evidence that they did not have them"
This was a burden of proof logical fallacy and again complete conjecture so I removed it. It is impossible to get evidence that a dinosaur "didn't have feathers", just like it's impossible to get evidence that "unicorns do not exist". You need evidence that something DOES exist. There is no evidence of feathering on Utahraptor.
As an endothermic animal gets bigger, the square-cube law means that they don’t need as much insulation to stay warm, and may even lose their integument almost entirely over a certain size threshold when they get too warm. This is why elephants, rhinos, and hippos are mostly hairless–they run very warm and a thick fur coat would cause them to fatally overheat. Even on Dakotaraptor we only have evidence that it's arms had some feathers. Zero evidence these larger raptors had a fully feathered body. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Pylon12 ( talk • contribs) 20:36, 13 November 2022 (UTC)
this page needs fixing up bad...
== Removed uncited addition == it also need a non-fetherd pics
This was just posted, and I wouldn't doubt that it's got some basis in fact, but I don't know of any citations for it. Any ideas, dromaeosaur people?
Some recent findings might suggest an even larger size for Utahraptor, perhaps more than 10 meters long. However, it is not clear if these remains (fragmentary) belong to Utahraptor ostrommaysorum, or to a completely new species.
J. Spencer 01:49, 14 May 2007 (UTC)
As I said on Talk:Dromiceiomimus, you need to look at the proportional relevence of these pop culture things. Especially in a case like Dinosaur comics. Raptor Red is *about* Utahraptor. The relevent portions of WWD are *about* the (hypothetical) behavior and environment of Utahraptor. The reader may gain more information, correct or incorrect, about this animal species by looking at these sources (can't speak to the other novel mentioned--since it's sci fi, I'd guess it's probably less notable and could be removed or reduced in emphasis). Now, Dinosaur Comics--you could replace the Utahraptor with an elephant or a talking carrot, and it would not change the comic one bit. It's a talking head (I'll reiterate I'm a fan!). The comic is not about dinosaurs (usually) in any way except that the author's points happen to be put in the mouths of dinosaur drawings. I would hesitate call anything in it but the rex "characters"! I'll leave the brief mention in here so I'm not the guy unilaterally removing DC stuff, but I'll state that I do not think DC is notable to the topic of Utahraptor at all. Dinoguy2 01:09, 5 September 2007 (UTC)
Utahraptor already has a popular culture section; adding a reference to DC would take one sentence and wouldn't add a new section on its own. I don't see how saying that Utahraptor could be replaced by anything else is relevant, because it's still a Utahraptor. There are plenty of talking head characters that are still, in the end, characters. This seems to be exactly the kind of reference that popular culture sections are made for.(
Ktwsolo (
talk)
00:50, 12 December 2008 (UTC))
Yes, it provides a look at a Utahraptor in popular culture which, from what I can see, is the very point of the heading. If popular depictions of Utahraptors were omnipresent, then yes, it would be silly. However, since that isn't the case, we don't really have to worry about that kind of escalation. Links to popular culture depictions of certain specific and unusual creatures abound. If adding a DC reference required adding a section just on its own, it probably wouldn't be worth it. But since there's already a section, we're talking about adding a single relevant sentence. It is relevant to Utahraptor in a popular culture framework to know about DC. Reading over the trivia advice shows me nothing to the contrary. ( 76.24.17.91 ( talk) 05:14, 12 December 2008 (UTC))
Knowing about Utahraptor in DC does the same thing that knowing about depictions in popular culture that explicitly involve "speculative reconstructions", "anatomical inaccuracies", and "fictional characteristics". What does any fictional depiction add in the way you mean? Your narrow rubric is obviously flawed. Knowing about a significant popular culture depiction of Utahraptor adds to understanding of Utahraptor in popular culture. How can this be so questionable considering a DC reference on the Tyrannosaurus page, where the proportional importance is much less?( Ktwsolo ( talk) 20:18, 12 December 2008 (UTC))
Well, arguing for other fanciful depictions of Utahraptor but not for one (more famous) one in particular is pretty silly. We could go back and forth on this for a long time, but it's pretty obvious that the popular culture section is not determined on whether the pop reference adds to the scientific understanding of the creature. And it's ridiculous to argue about proportional importance when a DC reference is sitting under the Tyrannosaur entry.
But I guess we've reached an understanding since now it is mentioned, although I'd say in a pretty amateur way. I'm going to clean it up if you don't mind. ( Ktwsolo ( talk) 20:31, 16 December 2008 (UTC))
The article says Utahraptor was 'up to 2m/6ft in height'. What posture does this refer to? The Jurassic park films are hardly documentary evidence, but they clearly show a raptor style skeleton is capable of changing ultimate hight by a fair margin. With mammals we measure up to the fore-shoulder whilst standing still. Is there an equivalent standardized measurement & posture for dinosaurs? ANTIcarrot 17:31, 20 September 2007 (UTC)
Why does the picture have it as 7m long when the article says that it's 6.5m long? 122.109.250.74 ( talk) 07:50, 5 May 2008 (UTC)
As far as I know, the largest specimen of Utahraptor has a femur length of 565 mm (Turner et al., 2012), a roughly similar value than Dilophosaurus femur estimated to weight 325 kg (Christiansen & Fariña, 2004). It is therefore untrue to speculate about, and illustrate, a 10 meters dromaeosaurid, since the largest one was slightly bigger than Achillobator, and was certainly not reaching 11 meters.-- Christophe Hendrickx ( talk) 19:52, 15 July 2013 (UTC)
It's a picky point, but I felt bad after reverting an IP's change to "plunderor" (a typo, but obvious what it is intended). So, "raptor" has been variously translated as "thief", "robber", and "plunderer". My American Heritage College Dictionary presents it as "one who seizes". The Dinosauria On-Line Omnipedia, from classicist Ben Creisler's work, uses "robber". Any thoughts? J. Spencer 19:44, 1 December 2007 (UTC)
I think we should use a different picture. Although smaller Dromaeosaurids had feathers, I don't think feathers would've been practical or useful to a large dinosaur such as Utahraptor, and there is no proof for it. -- JohnVMaster ( talk) 05:06, 14 April 2008 (UTC)
I have replaced the image with one that I created over the last several days. If anyone has any objections or suggestions for improvement, please let me know! - Ferahgo the Assassin ( talk) 05:14, 5 June 2011 (UTC)
If Utahraptor has no known descendants as Kirkland suggests, how would secondary loss of feathers require feathers to evolve twice in dromaeosaurids, and where in the cited study is this implied? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Whipsaw9 ( talk • contribs) 18:06, 3 December 2013 (UTC)
How is Utahraptor to be pronounced, since it is a mixed English-Latin word? If it was pronounced as a pure latin word (like most of scientific names), it would simply be IPA:utahraptor (a form I have actually heard used.) However, if mixed pronounciation is used, it would be something like IPA:ˈjuːtɑːraptor. On a note, I'm leaving out pure English pronounciation because I don't think it would be appropriate (even the mixed form might be problematic for speakers of other languages.) Is there any established rule concerning this? arny ( talk) 03:49, 9 June 2008 (UTC)
Feathers down here...
There is no real reason to believe these animals posessed feathers. It is impractical considering the climate of the period, and the nature of the animal to claim it had feathers.
8/30/08 —Preceding
unsigned comment added by
24.62.98.46 (
talk)
16:07, 30 August 2008 (UTC)
the most common consensus is that all Dromaeosaurs had feathers, because of this fact it is very unlikely that the image will be changed to suit your opinions, also you brought up a topic that is no longer even a debate anymore and is completely unrelated to this section.-- 50.195.51.9 ( talk) 19:16, 28 November 2012 (UTC)
The present image in the taxobox shows a reconstructed skeleton of Utahraptor with pronated hands. It also gives the wrong idea that the animal is known from a complete skeleton. Skeletal reconstructions, compared to images of actual fossil or a cast of it, should probably be put on the same level than real life reconstructions and be subjected to the same level of scrutiny. Does anybody feel the same? ArthurWeasley ( talk) 19:25, 17 March 2009 (UTC)
I heard that there was evidence it may have reached 12m long! Its probally false but i wanted to check. Spinodontosaurus ( talk) 16:19, 19 December 2009 (UTC)
Yes, According to M. Mortimer here http://dml.cmnh.org/2003Jul/msg00355.html, (Britt et al., 2001) is referenced to caudals twice as long as the holotype. A full specimen would thus be over 12m. This is also mentioned in DinoData: http://www.dinodata.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=7556&Itemid=67 - Rlinfinity ( talk) 10:54, 15 January 2010 (UTC)
Apparently so, but i dont know of anydromaeosaurid that excceeds 6m other than Utahraptor. Even Austroraptor and Archilobator are only 5m. Im sure its the largest Dromaeosaurid. Spinodontosaurus ( talk) 18:53, 2 February 2010 (UTC)
Oh, I thought it was a dromeosaur.
Would that message board be called topix dinosaur forum? If so im sorry on behalf of the guy who posted that, it was a prank, he got everyone fooled though! Spinodontosaurus ( talk) 23:52, 5 February 2010 (UTC)
I'm the one who changed that. Sorry about that. Oh and hi spinodontosaurus! I'm UTAHRAPTOR from topix. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Chessboy123 ( talk • contribs) 20:04, 12 February 2010 (UTC)
You know the first reference that has no actual link, i would like to know how to get a link for it. As refs like that are quite annoying (to me atleast) as you cant actually check them unless you have the paper itself, if it is a paper of course. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Spinodontosaurus ( talk • contribs) 19:16, 19 March 2010 (UTC)
Utahraptor weighed 1,500 pounds, not somewhat less than 1,100 pounds, as this article states. Would a 23-foot long dinosaur weigh "somewhat less than" 1,100 pounds? I dont't think so!
Utahraptor wasn't 10 feet long. That's Deinonychus. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Troodon58 ( talk • contribs) 00:38, 24 April 2010 (UTC)
But there's another theropod called Majungasaurus. It was the same length as Utahraptor, but it weighed one ton! And for Utahraptor, 1,000 pounds might be an overestimate? That doesn't make sense at all! Troodon58 05:52, 25 April 2010 (UTC)
Utahraptor also had heavyset legs. Its leg bones are twice as thick as the larger Allosaurus. And I do have a reference for this information: http://www.dinosaurfact.net/cretaceous/Utahraptor.php Troodon58 18:36, 26 April 2010 (UTC)
Yes, it does fit the "reliable" in "reliable source". Unlike Wikipedia, this site doesn't allow anyone to edit it. (I'm not saying that Wikipedia isn't a reliable source of information, though). Troodon58 18:40, 26 April 2010 (UTC)
You mean Walking With Dinosaurs? ( talk)
Well, I guess you're right. That's not a very good website. It also says that Troodon lived in Antarctica here: http://www.dinosaurfact.net/cretaceous/Troodon.php
I was wondering, would the right name be U. ostrommaysi or U. ostrommaysorum? Wasn't it changed to the latter because of a grammar error? Albertonykus ( talk) 00:52, 8 May 2010 (UTC)
And isn't there another species of Utahraptor? I think it's called U. spielbergi. 70.80.215.121 ( talk) 14:30, 28 May 2011 (UTC)Adam 70.80.215.121 ( talk) 14:30, 28 May 2011 (UTC)
Interesting, since Dougal Dixon's World Encyclopedia of Dinosaurs & Prehistoric Creatures lists them as two separate species. And it was published in 2007, nonetheless! 70.80.215.121 ( talk) 22:26, 6 June 2011 (UTC)Adam 70.80.215.121 ( talk) 22:26, 6 June 2011 (UTC)
User 65.102.29.189 has been insisting in edits that "raptor" properly translates to "thief" and so the etymology given in the description should be changed. Holtz 2008 translates the name as "Utah thief" so I went ahead and included both definitions. But, for the record, "raptor" is most precisely translated as "ravisher" or "abductor". See [11] MMartyniuk ( talk) 20:06, 24 September 2011 (UTC)
The timeline at the top of the infobox has an apparent mistake in it. It shows the temporal range of Utahaptor in the late Permian. This is impossible and also contradicts the rest of the article which puts it in the Cretaceous. TornadoLGS ( talk) 20:23, 20 October 2011 (UTC)
Could you please explain why Primeval: New World is not an appropriate inclusion into "In popular culture"? -- 79.223.23.167 ( talk) 01:53, 5 December 2012 (UTC)
all i can say is one would hope that people have now accepted that Utahraptor was probably feathered, but it appearing in one episode is not enough to justify adding it to the Popular culture section-- 50.195.51.9 ( talk) 16:56, 19 December 2012 (UTC)
The pop culture section currently states: "The program portrayed Utahraptor with several anatomical inaccuracies including pronated hands and featherless skin, and depicted them living in Europe when the only fossils of Utahraptor have been found in western North America." It cites the companion book for these statements. I don't have this book, but I'm suspicious of the idea it would actually point out the featherless and pronated hands as inaccurate. Can somebody verify that it does? Other wise this is OR and needs to be removed. MMartyniuk ( talk) 12:20, 30 January 2014 (UTC)
...
Ending pointless discussion about inappropriate WP:Original research WP:Synthesis |
---|
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it. |
In my opinion, Utahraptor inspired the " raptors " of the movies The Lost World: Jurassic Park, Jurassic Park III, Jurassic World. See that http://jurassicpark.wikia.com/wiki/Utahraptor. But of course for the movie Jurassic Park Deinonychus inspired the " raptors " but, after the Utahraptor's discovery, the " raptors " of the movie look like in reality to the Utahraptors. Edouard Plantagenet. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Edouard Plantagenêt ( talk • contribs) 21:02, 30 August 2015 (UTC)
I can support my claims with that http://jurassicpark.wikia.com/wiki/Utahraptor — Preceding unsigned comment added by Edouard Plantagenêt ( talk • contribs) 23:12, 30 August 2015 (UTC)
And I can support my claims with that http://uk.businessinsider.com/jurassic-world-dinosaurs-in-real-life-2015-6?r=US&IR=T, and that http://www.smithsonianmag.com/science-nature/what-do-we-really-know-about-utahraptor-95334335/?no-ist — Preceding unsigned comment added by Edouard Plantagenêt ( talk • contribs) 08:10, 31 August 2015 (UTC)
But the " raptors " of the movies are bigger than Deinonychus. And they did not change the size of raptors in the others movies. I think that for the first Jurassic Park, Deinonychus inspired the raptors. But the mistake is the fact that their raptors are too bigger than Deinonychus and Velociraptors. But after the discovery of Utahraptor, they decided no to change the size of the raptors for the others movies because they knew that raptors of this size existed. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Edouard Plantagenêt ( talk • contribs) 09:38, 31 August 2015 (UTC)
This picture shows that the size of Deinonychus has been exaggerated in Jurassic Park, and for the size the raptors of Jurassic Park look more like the Utahraptor that Deinonychus-- Edouard Plantagenêt ( talk) 18:37, 31 August 2015 (UTC)Edouard Plantagenêt-- Edouard Plantagenêt ( talk) 18:37, 31 August 2015 (UTC) And... Jody Duncan wrote about the discovery of Utahraptor : "Later, after we had designed and built the Raptor, there was a discovery of a Raptor skeleton in Utah, which they labeled 'super-slasher'. They had uncovered the largest Velociraptor to date - and it measured five-and-a-half-feet tall, just like ours. So we designed it, we built it, and then they discovered it. That still boggles my mind-- Edouard Plantagenêt ( talk) 18:43, 31 August 2015 (UTC)Edouard Plantagenêt
The picture and the quote demonstrate that Deinonychus inspired the raptors in Jurassic Park but, after they have realised the movie and the discovery of Utahraptor, they (in particular Jody Duncan) concluded that the raptors of the movie look like physically more to the Utahraptor than to the Deinonychus. So, for retroactivity, we can say that the raptors of Jurassic Park are the embodiment of the Utahraptor-- Edouard Plantagenêt ( talk) 19:52, 31 August 2015 (UTC)Edouard Plantagenêt-- Edouard Plantagenêt ( talk) 19:52, 31 August 2015 (UTC)
So by your behavior you are in contradiction with the team of the Jurassic Park movie-- Edouard Plantagenêt ( talk) 21:05, 31 August 2015 (UTC)Edouard Plantagenêt
|
The image Utahraptor_ostrommaysorum.JPG shows the "large curved claw" on either the first or third toe, depending on which side you start counting on. However, the first paragraph in the description states that it was on the second toe. This appears to be a contradiction, unless I'm somehow missing something. Any suggestions about how to fix this? Bayushikazemi ( talk) 15:14, 25 January 2013 (UTC)
According to Scott Hartman, the current anatomical model of Utahraptor is incorrect. Exactly how incorrect is unknown at the moment because the paper detailing the changes has not been published yet. 207.216.213.8 ( talk) 03:53, 15 April 2013 (UTC)
Recent report at the NY times gives the details: https://www.nytimes.com/2017/08/28/science/utah-paleontologists-turn-to-crowdfunding-for-raptor-project.html
Project website: https://www.gofundme.com/utahraptor . With nice illo by Julius Csotonyi -- Pete Tillman ( talk) 04:47, 25 September 2017 (UTC)
I believe at least two authorities have stated that Utahraptor was the dominant predator in its environment, as other giant therapods did not appear in N. America for some time after the Jurassic. Could we not get this stated and referenced in the article? 50.111.58.24 ( talk) 00:18, 16 June 2019 (UTC)
I know the rules is that you use 'an' if the word starts with a vowel, but it feels incorrect to say 'An Utahraptor' The JOJOLands ( talk) 08:32, 12 April 2023 (UTC)
![]() | This article is written in American English, which has its own spelling conventions (color, defense, traveled) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus. |
![]() | This ![]() It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
There was a lot of conjecture and simply false statements on this page. To begin with, "reasonable to assume that this trait was present in all of Dromaeosauridae" in reference to feathers is false. The same way you don't look at a woolly mammoth and presume all other elephants were covered in hair.
"Feathers were very unlikely to have evolved more than once, so assuming that any given dromaeosaurid, such as Utahraptor, lacked feathers would require positive evidence that they did not have them"
This was a burden of proof logical fallacy and again complete conjecture so I removed it. It is impossible to get evidence that a dinosaur "didn't have feathers", just like it's impossible to get evidence that "unicorns do not exist". You need evidence that something DOES exist. There is no evidence of feathering on Utahraptor.
As an endothermic animal gets bigger, the square-cube law means that they don’t need as much insulation to stay warm, and may even lose their integument almost entirely over a certain size threshold when they get too warm. This is why elephants, rhinos, and hippos are mostly hairless–they run very warm and a thick fur coat would cause them to fatally overheat. Even on Dakotaraptor we only have evidence that it's arms had some feathers. Zero evidence these larger raptors had a fully feathered body. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Pylon12 ( talk • contribs) 20:36, 13 November 2022 (UTC)
this page needs fixing up bad...
== Removed uncited addition == it also need a non-fetherd pics
This was just posted, and I wouldn't doubt that it's got some basis in fact, but I don't know of any citations for it. Any ideas, dromaeosaur people?
Some recent findings might suggest an even larger size for Utahraptor, perhaps more than 10 meters long. However, it is not clear if these remains (fragmentary) belong to Utahraptor ostrommaysorum, or to a completely new species.
J. Spencer 01:49, 14 May 2007 (UTC)
As I said on Talk:Dromiceiomimus, you need to look at the proportional relevence of these pop culture things. Especially in a case like Dinosaur comics. Raptor Red is *about* Utahraptor. The relevent portions of WWD are *about* the (hypothetical) behavior and environment of Utahraptor. The reader may gain more information, correct or incorrect, about this animal species by looking at these sources (can't speak to the other novel mentioned--since it's sci fi, I'd guess it's probably less notable and could be removed or reduced in emphasis). Now, Dinosaur Comics--you could replace the Utahraptor with an elephant or a talking carrot, and it would not change the comic one bit. It's a talking head (I'll reiterate I'm a fan!). The comic is not about dinosaurs (usually) in any way except that the author's points happen to be put in the mouths of dinosaur drawings. I would hesitate call anything in it but the rex "characters"! I'll leave the brief mention in here so I'm not the guy unilaterally removing DC stuff, but I'll state that I do not think DC is notable to the topic of Utahraptor at all. Dinoguy2 01:09, 5 September 2007 (UTC)
Utahraptor already has a popular culture section; adding a reference to DC would take one sentence and wouldn't add a new section on its own. I don't see how saying that Utahraptor could be replaced by anything else is relevant, because it's still a Utahraptor. There are plenty of talking head characters that are still, in the end, characters. This seems to be exactly the kind of reference that popular culture sections are made for.(
Ktwsolo (
talk)
00:50, 12 December 2008 (UTC))
Yes, it provides a look at a Utahraptor in popular culture which, from what I can see, is the very point of the heading. If popular depictions of Utahraptors were omnipresent, then yes, it would be silly. However, since that isn't the case, we don't really have to worry about that kind of escalation. Links to popular culture depictions of certain specific and unusual creatures abound. If adding a DC reference required adding a section just on its own, it probably wouldn't be worth it. But since there's already a section, we're talking about adding a single relevant sentence. It is relevant to Utahraptor in a popular culture framework to know about DC. Reading over the trivia advice shows me nothing to the contrary. ( 76.24.17.91 ( talk) 05:14, 12 December 2008 (UTC))
Knowing about Utahraptor in DC does the same thing that knowing about depictions in popular culture that explicitly involve "speculative reconstructions", "anatomical inaccuracies", and "fictional characteristics". What does any fictional depiction add in the way you mean? Your narrow rubric is obviously flawed. Knowing about a significant popular culture depiction of Utahraptor adds to understanding of Utahraptor in popular culture. How can this be so questionable considering a DC reference on the Tyrannosaurus page, where the proportional importance is much less?( Ktwsolo ( talk) 20:18, 12 December 2008 (UTC))
Well, arguing for other fanciful depictions of Utahraptor but not for one (more famous) one in particular is pretty silly. We could go back and forth on this for a long time, but it's pretty obvious that the popular culture section is not determined on whether the pop reference adds to the scientific understanding of the creature. And it's ridiculous to argue about proportional importance when a DC reference is sitting under the Tyrannosaur entry.
But I guess we've reached an understanding since now it is mentioned, although I'd say in a pretty amateur way. I'm going to clean it up if you don't mind. ( Ktwsolo ( talk) 20:31, 16 December 2008 (UTC))
The article says Utahraptor was 'up to 2m/6ft in height'. What posture does this refer to? The Jurassic park films are hardly documentary evidence, but they clearly show a raptor style skeleton is capable of changing ultimate hight by a fair margin. With mammals we measure up to the fore-shoulder whilst standing still. Is there an equivalent standardized measurement & posture for dinosaurs? ANTIcarrot 17:31, 20 September 2007 (UTC)
Why does the picture have it as 7m long when the article says that it's 6.5m long? 122.109.250.74 ( talk) 07:50, 5 May 2008 (UTC)
As far as I know, the largest specimen of Utahraptor has a femur length of 565 mm (Turner et al., 2012), a roughly similar value than Dilophosaurus femur estimated to weight 325 kg (Christiansen & Fariña, 2004). It is therefore untrue to speculate about, and illustrate, a 10 meters dromaeosaurid, since the largest one was slightly bigger than Achillobator, and was certainly not reaching 11 meters.-- Christophe Hendrickx ( talk) 19:52, 15 July 2013 (UTC)
It's a picky point, but I felt bad after reverting an IP's change to "plunderor" (a typo, but obvious what it is intended). So, "raptor" has been variously translated as "thief", "robber", and "plunderer". My American Heritage College Dictionary presents it as "one who seizes". The Dinosauria On-Line Omnipedia, from classicist Ben Creisler's work, uses "robber". Any thoughts? J. Spencer 19:44, 1 December 2007 (UTC)
I think we should use a different picture. Although smaller Dromaeosaurids had feathers, I don't think feathers would've been practical or useful to a large dinosaur such as Utahraptor, and there is no proof for it. -- JohnVMaster ( talk) 05:06, 14 April 2008 (UTC)
I have replaced the image with one that I created over the last several days. If anyone has any objections or suggestions for improvement, please let me know! - Ferahgo the Assassin ( talk) 05:14, 5 June 2011 (UTC)
If Utahraptor has no known descendants as Kirkland suggests, how would secondary loss of feathers require feathers to evolve twice in dromaeosaurids, and where in the cited study is this implied? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Whipsaw9 ( talk • contribs) 18:06, 3 December 2013 (UTC)
How is Utahraptor to be pronounced, since it is a mixed English-Latin word? If it was pronounced as a pure latin word (like most of scientific names), it would simply be IPA:utahraptor (a form I have actually heard used.) However, if mixed pronounciation is used, it would be something like IPA:ˈjuːtɑːraptor. On a note, I'm leaving out pure English pronounciation because I don't think it would be appropriate (even the mixed form might be problematic for speakers of other languages.) Is there any established rule concerning this? arny ( talk) 03:49, 9 June 2008 (UTC)
Feathers down here...
There is no real reason to believe these animals posessed feathers. It is impractical considering the climate of the period, and the nature of the animal to claim it had feathers.
8/30/08 —Preceding
unsigned comment added by
24.62.98.46 (
talk)
16:07, 30 August 2008 (UTC)
the most common consensus is that all Dromaeosaurs had feathers, because of this fact it is very unlikely that the image will be changed to suit your opinions, also you brought up a topic that is no longer even a debate anymore and is completely unrelated to this section.-- 50.195.51.9 ( talk) 19:16, 28 November 2012 (UTC)
The present image in the taxobox shows a reconstructed skeleton of Utahraptor with pronated hands. It also gives the wrong idea that the animal is known from a complete skeleton. Skeletal reconstructions, compared to images of actual fossil or a cast of it, should probably be put on the same level than real life reconstructions and be subjected to the same level of scrutiny. Does anybody feel the same? ArthurWeasley ( talk) 19:25, 17 March 2009 (UTC)
I heard that there was evidence it may have reached 12m long! Its probally false but i wanted to check. Spinodontosaurus ( talk) 16:19, 19 December 2009 (UTC)
Yes, According to M. Mortimer here http://dml.cmnh.org/2003Jul/msg00355.html, (Britt et al., 2001) is referenced to caudals twice as long as the holotype. A full specimen would thus be over 12m. This is also mentioned in DinoData: http://www.dinodata.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=7556&Itemid=67 - Rlinfinity ( talk) 10:54, 15 January 2010 (UTC)
Apparently so, but i dont know of anydromaeosaurid that excceeds 6m other than Utahraptor. Even Austroraptor and Archilobator are only 5m. Im sure its the largest Dromaeosaurid. Spinodontosaurus ( talk) 18:53, 2 February 2010 (UTC)
Oh, I thought it was a dromeosaur.
Would that message board be called topix dinosaur forum? If so im sorry on behalf of the guy who posted that, it was a prank, he got everyone fooled though! Spinodontosaurus ( talk) 23:52, 5 February 2010 (UTC)
I'm the one who changed that. Sorry about that. Oh and hi spinodontosaurus! I'm UTAHRAPTOR from topix. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Chessboy123 ( talk • contribs) 20:04, 12 February 2010 (UTC)
You know the first reference that has no actual link, i would like to know how to get a link for it. As refs like that are quite annoying (to me atleast) as you cant actually check them unless you have the paper itself, if it is a paper of course. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Spinodontosaurus ( talk • contribs) 19:16, 19 March 2010 (UTC)
Utahraptor weighed 1,500 pounds, not somewhat less than 1,100 pounds, as this article states. Would a 23-foot long dinosaur weigh "somewhat less than" 1,100 pounds? I dont't think so!
Utahraptor wasn't 10 feet long. That's Deinonychus. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Troodon58 ( talk • contribs) 00:38, 24 April 2010 (UTC)
But there's another theropod called Majungasaurus. It was the same length as Utahraptor, but it weighed one ton! And for Utahraptor, 1,000 pounds might be an overestimate? That doesn't make sense at all! Troodon58 05:52, 25 April 2010 (UTC)
Utahraptor also had heavyset legs. Its leg bones are twice as thick as the larger Allosaurus. And I do have a reference for this information: http://www.dinosaurfact.net/cretaceous/Utahraptor.php Troodon58 18:36, 26 April 2010 (UTC)
Yes, it does fit the "reliable" in "reliable source". Unlike Wikipedia, this site doesn't allow anyone to edit it. (I'm not saying that Wikipedia isn't a reliable source of information, though). Troodon58 18:40, 26 April 2010 (UTC)
You mean Walking With Dinosaurs? ( talk)
Well, I guess you're right. That's not a very good website. It also says that Troodon lived in Antarctica here: http://www.dinosaurfact.net/cretaceous/Troodon.php
I was wondering, would the right name be U. ostrommaysi or U. ostrommaysorum? Wasn't it changed to the latter because of a grammar error? Albertonykus ( talk) 00:52, 8 May 2010 (UTC)
And isn't there another species of Utahraptor? I think it's called U. spielbergi. 70.80.215.121 ( talk) 14:30, 28 May 2011 (UTC)Adam 70.80.215.121 ( talk) 14:30, 28 May 2011 (UTC)
Interesting, since Dougal Dixon's World Encyclopedia of Dinosaurs & Prehistoric Creatures lists them as two separate species. And it was published in 2007, nonetheless! 70.80.215.121 ( talk) 22:26, 6 June 2011 (UTC)Adam 70.80.215.121 ( talk) 22:26, 6 June 2011 (UTC)
User 65.102.29.189 has been insisting in edits that "raptor" properly translates to "thief" and so the etymology given in the description should be changed. Holtz 2008 translates the name as "Utah thief" so I went ahead and included both definitions. But, for the record, "raptor" is most precisely translated as "ravisher" or "abductor". See [11] MMartyniuk ( talk) 20:06, 24 September 2011 (UTC)
The timeline at the top of the infobox has an apparent mistake in it. It shows the temporal range of Utahaptor in the late Permian. This is impossible and also contradicts the rest of the article which puts it in the Cretaceous. TornadoLGS ( talk) 20:23, 20 October 2011 (UTC)
Could you please explain why Primeval: New World is not an appropriate inclusion into "In popular culture"? -- 79.223.23.167 ( talk) 01:53, 5 December 2012 (UTC)
all i can say is one would hope that people have now accepted that Utahraptor was probably feathered, but it appearing in one episode is not enough to justify adding it to the Popular culture section-- 50.195.51.9 ( talk) 16:56, 19 December 2012 (UTC)
The pop culture section currently states: "The program portrayed Utahraptor with several anatomical inaccuracies including pronated hands and featherless skin, and depicted them living in Europe when the only fossils of Utahraptor have been found in western North America." It cites the companion book for these statements. I don't have this book, but I'm suspicious of the idea it would actually point out the featherless and pronated hands as inaccurate. Can somebody verify that it does? Other wise this is OR and needs to be removed. MMartyniuk ( talk) 12:20, 30 January 2014 (UTC)
...
Ending pointless discussion about inappropriate WP:Original research WP:Synthesis |
---|
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it. |
In my opinion, Utahraptor inspired the " raptors " of the movies The Lost World: Jurassic Park, Jurassic Park III, Jurassic World. See that http://jurassicpark.wikia.com/wiki/Utahraptor. But of course for the movie Jurassic Park Deinonychus inspired the " raptors " but, after the Utahraptor's discovery, the " raptors " of the movie look like in reality to the Utahraptors. Edouard Plantagenet. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Edouard Plantagenêt ( talk • contribs) 21:02, 30 August 2015 (UTC)
I can support my claims with that http://jurassicpark.wikia.com/wiki/Utahraptor — Preceding unsigned comment added by Edouard Plantagenêt ( talk • contribs) 23:12, 30 August 2015 (UTC)
And I can support my claims with that http://uk.businessinsider.com/jurassic-world-dinosaurs-in-real-life-2015-6?r=US&IR=T, and that http://www.smithsonianmag.com/science-nature/what-do-we-really-know-about-utahraptor-95334335/?no-ist — Preceding unsigned comment added by Edouard Plantagenêt ( talk • contribs) 08:10, 31 August 2015 (UTC)
But the " raptors " of the movies are bigger than Deinonychus. And they did not change the size of raptors in the others movies. I think that for the first Jurassic Park, Deinonychus inspired the raptors. But the mistake is the fact that their raptors are too bigger than Deinonychus and Velociraptors. But after the discovery of Utahraptor, they decided no to change the size of the raptors for the others movies because they knew that raptors of this size existed. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Edouard Plantagenêt ( talk • contribs) 09:38, 31 August 2015 (UTC)
This picture shows that the size of Deinonychus has been exaggerated in Jurassic Park, and for the size the raptors of Jurassic Park look more like the Utahraptor that Deinonychus-- Edouard Plantagenêt ( talk) 18:37, 31 August 2015 (UTC)Edouard Plantagenêt-- Edouard Plantagenêt ( talk) 18:37, 31 August 2015 (UTC) And... Jody Duncan wrote about the discovery of Utahraptor : "Later, after we had designed and built the Raptor, there was a discovery of a Raptor skeleton in Utah, which they labeled 'super-slasher'. They had uncovered the largest Velociraptor to date - and it measured five-and-a-half-feet tall, just like ours. So we designed it, we built it, and then they discovered it. That still boggles my mind-- Edouard Plantagenêt ( talk) 18:43, 31 August 2015 (UTC)Edouard Plantagenêt
The picture and the quote demonstrate that Deinonychus inspired the raptors in Jurassic Park but, after they have realised the movie and the discovery of Utahraptor, they (in particular Jody Duncan) concluded that the raptors of the movie look like physically more to the Utahraptor than to the Deinonychus. So, for retroactivity, we can say that the raptors of Jurassic Park are the embodiment of the Utahraptor-- Edouard Plantagenêt ( talk) 19:52, 31 August 2015 (UTC)Edouard Plantagenêt-- Edouard Plantagenêt ( talk) 19:52, 31 August 2015 (UTC)
So by your behavior you are in contradiction with the team of the Jurassic Park movie-- Edouard Plantagenêt ( talk) 21:05, 31 August 2015 (UTC)Edouard Plantagenêt
|
The image Utahraptor_ostrommaysorum.JPG shows the "large curved claw" on either the first or third toe, depending on which side you start counting on. However, the first paragraph in the description states that it was on the second toe. This appears to be a contradiction, unless I'm somehow missing something. Any suggestions about how to fix this? Bayushikazemi ( talk) 15:14, 25 January 2013 (UTC)
According to Scott Hartman, the current anatomical model of Utahraptor is incorrect. Exactly how incorrect is unknown at the moment because the paper detailing the changes has not been published yet. 207.216.213.8 ( talk) 03:53, 15 April 2013 (UTC)
Recent report at the NY times gives the details: https://www.nytimes.com/2017/08/28/science/utah-paleontologists-turn-to-crowdfunding-for-raptor-project.html
Project website: https://www.gofundme.com/utahraptor . With nice illo by Julius Csotonyi -- Pete Tillman ( talk) 04:47, 25 September 2017 (UTC)
I believe at least two authorities have stated that Utahraptor was the dominant predator in its environment, as other giant therapods did not appear in N. America for some time after the Jurassic. Could we not get this stated and referenced in the article? 50.111.58.24 ( talk) 00:18, 16 June 2019 (UTC)
I know the rules is that you use 'an' if the word starts with a vowel, but it feels incorrect to say 'An Utahraptor' The JOJOLands ( talk) 08:32, 12 April 2023 (UTC)