This page is mainly for reviewing the accuracy of non-dinosaur paleoart (usually by the artists themselves, but anyone who wants an image scrutinized is welcome to post them for review). Any other image, such as size comparisons or photos of skeletal mounts, can also be posted here to review their accuracy. If you want to submit paleoart images for accuracy review, place them here as well as links to what you used as references. If you want to participate as reviewer, you can put the page on your watchlist. New images of any type can also be requested by including "Request:" in the section title, and if submitted, such an image will thereafter be reviewed. Sections are archived automatically after some time when a discussion stalls, to encourage speedy responses from both artists and reviewers. It is allowed to revive sections if they have been archived before being resolved, unlike regular talk page archives. Modifications of previously uploaded amateur restorations to correct anatomical inaccuracies is encouraged (including by others than the original artists), but modifications of historical restorations are discouraged, as these should be used to show historical ideas. Drastic modifications to restorations published in peer-reviewed journals should be uploaded as separate files, so that both versions are available. Images that have been deemed inaccurate should be tagged with the Wikimedia Commons template "Inaccurate paleoart" [5] (which automatically adds the "Inaccurate paleoart" category [6]), so they can be prevented from being used and easily located for correction. User created images are not considered original research, per WP:OI and WP:PERTINENCE [a], but it is appreciated if sources used are listed in file descriptions (this is often requested during WP:Featured Article reviews). Guidelines for use of paleoart, adapted from WikiProject Dinosaurs' image review page: Criterion sufficient for using an image:
Criteria sufficient to remove an image:
|
DBogdanov just uploaded so many new drawings that I thought it best to make a new section rather than add them to the previous one where they may be overlooked. I don't know anything about any of these, but on the Discord server it was mentioned that the Hyaenodonhas a way too large head and is based on a chimaeric specimen (head could be shrunk if we want to use it). I also think I read somewhere that hyaenodonts are supposed to have been plantigrade, but these restorations are all digitigrade. Is it incorrect? FunkMonk ( talk) 19:22, 25 January 2024 (UTC)
Here's a life restoration of Aegirosaurus, one of the most completely known ichthyosaurs but badly in need of images on WP. How does it look? -- Slate Weasel [ Talk - Contribs 21:44, 30 March 2024 (UTC)
Noticed this was added by Mario Lanzas without review. Are there any issues for that? Ta-tea-two-te-to ( talk) 00:11, 31 March 2024 (UTC)
LiterallyMiguel ( talk) 18:01, 9 April 2024 (UTC)
Here are all of this user's uploads (including Teraterpeton, discussed above). I can't speak to the little anatomical details, but they seem quite good artistically. - SlvrHwk ( talk) 16:14, 10 April 2024 (UTC)
Found this, how is it good, I haven't seen original description and proper interpretation other than Peters. Ta-tea-two-te-to ( talk) 06:01, 10 April 2024 (UTC)
Made this artwork to represent the diversity of mammals that would have existed in the Late Cretaceous of North America. I don't know in which context they would be best introduced in a page, but thought of placing it here for review in any case. YellowPanda2001 ( talk) 22:42, 11 April 2024 (UTC)
I just uploaded cropped version of Nobu Tamura's new Utatsusaurus since it looks more accurate than previous one, but are there problems? Also created new size chart based on Motani et al. (1998) [15] since older one looks oversized and body shape is inaccurate. Ta-tea-two-te-to ( talk) 16:27, 14 April 2024 (UTC)
here i hav an illustration of Smilosuchus Gregorii [16]
is it good and could i add it alongside another illustration of the head of Smilosuchus Adamenensis?? LiterallyMiguel ( talk) 22:30, 16 April 2024 (UTC)
Somewhat belated for a number of these, my apologies. Hemiauchenia ( talk) 22:43, 20 April 2024 (UTC)
Hello. Here is a reconstruction of the annelid worm, Plumulites bengstoni. PaleoEquii ( talk) 22:51, 23 April 2024 (UTC)
@ PaleoEquii: also created reconstruction of Pambdelurion (originally created as Omnidens and posted to Twitter but I recommended him to upload this as Pambdelurion). Spines on frontal appendage looks like different from reconstruction by @ Junnn11:, but I think spine numbers are uncertain? Ta-tea-two-te-to ( talk) 16:11, 14 May 2024 (UTC)
Hey all, some new reconstructions of weirdo artiodactyls of Eocene Europe
Triloboii ( talk) 03:43, 24 April 2024 (UTC)
SeismicShrimp ( talk) 01:37, 18 April 2024 (UTC)
Trying to keep things together here for future reference so I'm posting this as a subsection of the above.
What an animal... The silhouette is mostly just a very large Shonisaurus. Comments appreciated. - SlvrHwk ( talk) 06:32, 18 April 2024 (UTC)
Here is my latest art released, a sketch for the new and colossal Ichthyotitan! I also have a piece for Gamatavus that I've had sitting around on Wikimedia for about a year now, and I never got the time to also share it. With that said, please let me know your thoughts on these two! SpinoDragon145 ( talk) 05:42, 18 April 2024 (UTC)
Hi, wanna put this Ichthyotitan restoration up for review, since the remains aren't that good I based some of it off related Ichthyosaurs like Shonisaurus, though I don't usually make artwork of Ichthyosaurs so I've very little idea how much I got it right... Please check it out and let me know if there's any problem with it, thanks! :) Edit: I should also probably mention all the art references I've used for this, I used the size comparison on its page by SlvrHwk based on Shonisaurus, the artwork by Sergey Krasovskiy and one by Gabriel Ugueto Ansh Saxena 7163 ( talk) 06:25, 22 April 2024 (UTC)
Please check if it could be applicable and if it is accurate. Stegotyranno ( talk) 04:44, 24 April 2024 (UTC)
Now new study [19] have shown complete remain of Ptychodus. Although paper is not freely licensed, supplementary information of the paper [20] is CC BY 4.0 which we can use some of fossil images. Either way, I think we probably need new Ptychodus reconstruction based on Mexican specimen. @ Damouraptor: or @ EvolutionIncarnate: would be interested in that? Supplementary material also includes size estimation of multiple specimens based on newly found specimen. I wonder if @ PaleoNeolitic: would be good at making new size chart? Ta-tea-two-te-to ( talk) 07:57, 24 April 2024 (UTC)
Work by @ PlacodermReconstructions:. Some are replaced without review. Those models look fine to me but any opinions? Also PlacodermReconstructions, are you interested in making new reconstruction of Bothriolepis canadensis based on this study [21] since most others reconstructed fins outdated? (your previous drawing looks not good at proportion to be honest) Ta-tea-two-te-to ( talk) 09:13, 24 April 2024 (UTC)
For Makarkinia, as I see there are no morphological issue but any opinions? This blogpost estimated flying posture of Kalligrammatids [22] and shows some videos which shows slow-motion of flight of neuropterans, comparing that this would be fine. Ta-tea-two-te-to ( talk) 15:03, 24 April 2024 (UTC)
Pteranodon sternbergi review for accuracy
Jfstudiospaleoart ( talk) 14:52, 30 April 2024 (UTC)
I've recently started working on the
Parapliohyrax article, which should be finished tonight. Constating that hyraxes reconstructions are not only rare, but the papers containing their descriptions are, in most cases, and like those of a large number of other Cenozoic taxa, wildly unavailable to public access, it could be good if at least scale charts could be realized about the
Pliohyracidae and the
Titanohyracidae.
If a potential artist is interested to give a more deep look into this group to create a life reconstruction, and search for taxa known from good materials and important locations, I can recommend
Saghatherium (known from extensive postcrania),
Antilohyrax,
Afrohyrax,
Thyrohyrax,
Megalohyrax,
Prohyrax,
Pachyhyrax,
Parapliohyrax and
Postschizotherium. Skeletal diagrams are welcome too, specially for postcrania.
As an aside, the recent reconstructions of
Pliohyrax and
Kvabebihyrax by @
ДиБгд: (Dmitry Bogdanov) are both well-executed and quite educative. The reconstruction of
Titanohyrax, here presented, however, posted 12 years ago, has aged quite a lot ; it is quite skinwrapped, with an almost complete loss of fur (a condition that is rare in most mammals of its size) and I'm not sure about some of the feet articulations (given the lack of postcranial material, these long limbs being seemingly based, with a good reasoning, on its smaller parent Antilohyrax, despite the important size difference.) Given that extinct hyracoids are not the group with the most reconstructions out there, I'd recommend keeping it on page for the time being, until a more up-to-date reconstruction is provided - the edits needed being probably too important to simply modify it.
Larrayal (
talk) 18:37, 30 April 2024 (UTC)
Already reported in Discord server, but A.C. Tatarinov (yes, again) uploaded AI-generated reconstruction of Postschizotherium and used that in Russian Wikipedia article. This is surely problematic... Ta-tea-two-te-to ( talk) 01:25, 5 May 2024 (UTC)
Hi! Wanted to put this Vasuki life reconstruction up for review... since it's only known from a few vertebrae I didn't have much to go off with, but I've tried to keep it in line with Madtsoiidae in general, taking inferences from Madtsoia and Gigantophis Ansh Saxena 7163 ( talk) 18:01, 9 May 2024 (UTC)
Those arts are added by @ Fridge Eater: without review. Are there any anatomical issues? Ta-tea-two-te-to ( talk) 02:08, 11 May 2024 (UTC)
Created life restoration of Pliodetes, lepisosteiform from Elrhaz Formation. Proportion and fin placement are based on Wenz (1999) (inaccessible, I obtained from resource exchange and shared that in discord server), and head anatomy is based on Cavin and Suteethorn (2006). [25] I already got review by User:Orthocormus but any opinions from others? Ta-tea-two-te-to ( talk) 01:27, 17 May 2024 (UTC)
Made this artwork to be included in the Tanis (fossil site) page. It was a bit challenging to guess where I should ask for advice in this piece, given there isn't much going on, but I decided to add it here for review. YellowPanda2001 ( talk) 12:45, 19 March 2024 (UTC)
Hey folks, our next Eocene European mammal, Dichodon.
Triloboii ( talk) 20:47, 23 May 2024 (UTC)
Seems that this image is added to page without review, and uploader seems to be author of the research
[26] Dan Valentin Palcu. Seems that this image origins at late 2023.
[27] Maybe it would be fine that is created by paper author himself, but there is some concerns, that first image includes multiple logos, and size chart seems to directly taken from Prehistoric Wildlife (which is already dead website, here is archive link
[28]
[29]). How should we deal that and other than that are there any issues?
Ta-tea-two-te-to (
talk) 12:45, 25 May 2024 (UTC)
I am very rusty in my knowledge of Synapsids and even more so in their anatomy, and this image is from 2017, but I gave it a little background and improvements to make it look better. Levi bernardo ( talk) 20:50, 28 May 2024 (UTC)
@ Olmagon I have fixed Daidal, do you think it is okay now? Qohelet12 ( talk) 06:08, 29 May 2024 (UTC)
Put this together for the page on this Kem Kem catfish, using the paper's reconstruction as a guide. - SlvrHwk ( talk) 07:08, 30 May 2024 (UTC)
Ok I tried to draw Meganeura as accurately as possible. Qohelet12 ( talk) 19:50, 2 June 2024 (UTC)
This page is mainly for reviewing the accuracy of non-dinosaur paleoart (usually by the artists themselves, but anyone who wants an image scrutinized is welcome to post them for review). Any other image, such as size comparisons or photos of skeletal mounts, can also be posted here to review their accuracy. If you want to submit paleoart images for accuracy review, place them here as well as links to what you used as references. If you want to participate as reviewer, you can put the page on your watchlist. New images of any type can also be requested by including "Request:" in the section title, and if submitted, such an image will thereafter be reviewed. Sections are archived automatically after some time when a discussion stalls, to encourage speedy responses from both artists and reviewers. It is allowed to revive sections if they have been archived before being resolved, unlike regular talk page archives. Modifications of previously uploaded amateur restorations to correct anatomical inaccuracies is encouraged (including by others than the original artists), but modifications of historical restorations are discouraged, as these should be used to show historical ideas. Drastic modifications to restorations published in peer-reviewed journals should be uploaded as separate files, so that both versions are available. Images that have been deemed inaccurate should be tagged with the Wikimedia Commons template "Inaccurate paleoart" [5] (which automatically adds the "Inaccurate paleoart" category [6]), so they can be prevented from being used and easily located for correction. User created images are not considered original research, per WP:OI and WP:PERTINENCE [a], but it is appreciated if sources used are listed in file descriptions (this is often requested during WP:Featured Article reviews). Guidelines for use of paleoart, adapted from WikiProject Dinosaurs' image review page: Criterion sufficient for using an image:
Criteria sufficient to remove an image:
|
DBogdanov just uploaded so many new drawings that I thought it best to make a new section rather than add them to the previous one where they may be overlooked. I don't know anything about any of these, but on the Discord server it was mentioned that the Hyaenodonhas a way too large head and is based on a chimaeric specimen (head could be shrunk if we want to use it). I also think I read somewhere that hyaenodonts are supposed to have been plantigrade, but these restorations are all digitigrade. Is it incorrect? FunkMonk ( talk) 19:22, 25 January 2024 (UTC)
Here's a life restoration of Aegirosaurus, one of the most completely known ichthyosaurs but badly in need of images on WP. How does it look? -- Slate Weasel [ Talk - Contribs 21:44, 30 March 2024 (UTC)
Noticed this was added by Mario Lanzas without review. Are there any issues for that? Ta-tea-two-te-to ( talk) 00:11, 31 March 2024 (UTC)
LiterallyMiguel ( talk) 18:01, 9 April 2024 (UTC)
Here are all of this user's uploads (including Teraterpeton, discussed above). I can't speak to the little anatomical details, but they seem quite good artistically. - SlvrHwk ( talk) 16:14, 10 April 2024 (UTC)
Found this, how is it good, I haven't seen original description and proper interpretation other than Peters. Ta-tea-two-te-to ( talk) 06:01, 10 April 2024 (UTC)
Made this artwork to represent the diversity of mammals that would have existed in the Late Cretaceous of North America. I don't know in which context they would be best introduced in a page, but thought of placing it here for review in any case. YellowPanda2001 ( talk) 22:42, 11 April 2024 (UTC)
I just uploaded cropped version of Nobu Tamura's new Utatsusaurus since it looks more accurate than previous one, but are there problems? Also created new size chart based on Motani et al. (1998) [15] since older one looks oversized and body shape is inaccurate. Ta-tea-two-te-to ( talk) 16:27, 14 April 2024 (UTC)
here i hav an illustration of Smilosuchus Gregorii [16]
is it good and could i add it alongside another illustration of the head of Smilosuchus Adamenensis?? LiterallyMiguel ( talk) 22:30, 16 April 2024 (UTC)
Somewhat belated for a number of these, my apologies. Hemiauchenia ( talk) 22:43, 20 April 2024 (UTC)
Hello. Here is a reconstruction of the annelid worm, Plumulites bengstoni. PaleoEquii ( talk) 22:51, 23 April 2024 (UTC)
@ PaleoEquii: also created reconstruction of Pambdelurion (originally created as Omnidens and posted to Twitter but I recommended him to upload this as Pambdelurion). Spines on frontal appendage looks like different from reconstruction by @ Junnn11:, but I think spine numbers are uncertain? Ta-tea-two-te-to ( talk) 16:11, 14 May 2024 (UTC)
Hey all, some new reconstructions of weirdo artiodactyls of Eocene Europe
Triloboii ( talk) 03:43, 24 April 2024 (UTC)
SeismicShrimp ( talk) 01:37, 18 April 2024 (UTC)
Trying to keep things together here for future reference so I'm posting this as a subsection of the above.
What an animal... The silhouette is mostly just a very large Shonisaurus. Comments appreciated. - SlvrHwk ( talk) 06:32, 18 April 2024 (UTC)
Here is my latest art released, a sketch for the new and colossal Ichthyotitan! I also have a piece for Gamatavus that I've had sitting around on Wikimedia for about a year now, and I never got the time to also share it. With that said, please let me know your thoughts on these two! SpinoDragon145 ( talk) 05:42, 18 April 2024 (UTC)
Hi, wanna put this Ichthyotitan restoration up for review, since the remains aren't that good I based some of it off related Ichthyosaurs like Shonisaurus, though I don't usually make artwork of Ichthyosaurs so I've very little idea how much I got it right... Please check it out and let me know if there's any problem with it, thanks! :) Edit: I should also probably mention all the art references I've used for this, I used the size comparison on its page by SlvrHwk based on Shonisaurus, the artwork by Sergey Krasovskiy and one by Gabriel Ugueto Ansh Saxena 7163 ( talk) 06:25, 22 April 2024 (UTC)
Please check if it could be applicable and if it is accurate. Stegotyranno ( talk) 04:44, 24 April 2024 (UTC)
Now new study [19] have shown complete remain of Ptychodus. Although paper is not freely licensed, supplementary information of the paper [20] is CC BY 4.0 which we can use some of fossil images. Either way, I think we probably need new Ptychodus reconstruction based on Mexican specimen. @ Damouraptor: or @ EvolutionIncarnate: would be interested in that? Supplementary material also includes size estimation of multiple specimens based on newly found specimen. I wonder if @ PaleoNeolitic: would be good at making new size chart? Ta-tea-two-te-to ( talk) 07:57, 24 April 2024 (UTC)
Work by @ PlacodermReconstructions:. Some are replaced without review. Those models look fine to me but any opinions? Also PlacodermReconstructions, are you interested in making new reconstruction of Bothriolepis canadensis based on this study [21] since most others reconstructed fins outdated? (your previous drawing looks not good at proportion to be honest) Ta-tea-two-te-to ( talk) 09:13, 24 April 2024 (UTC)
For Makarkinia, as I see there are no morphological issue but any opinions? This blogpost estimated flying posture of Kalligrammatids [22] and shows some videos which shows slow-motion of flight of neuropterans, comparing that this would be fine. Ta-tea-two-te-to ( talk) 15:03, 24 April 2024 (UTC)
Pteranodon sternbergi review for accuracy
Jfstudiospaleoart ( talk) 14:52, 30 April 2024 (UTC)
I've recently started working on the
Parapliohyrax article, which should be finished tonight. Constating that hyraxes reconstructions are not only rare, but the papers containing their descriptions are, in most cases, and like those of a large number of other Cenozoic taxa, wildly unavailable to public access, it could be good if at least scale charts could be realized about the
Pliohyracidae and the
Titanohyracidae.
If a potential artist is interested to give a more deep look into this group to create a life reconstruction, and search for taxa known from good materials and important locations, I can recommend
Saghatherium (known from extensive postcrania),
Antilohyrax,
Afrohyrax,
Thyrohyrax,
Megalohyrax,
Prohyrax,
Pachyhyrax,
Parapliohyrax and
Postschizotherium. Skeletal diagrams are welcome too, specially for postcrania.
As an aside, the recent reconstructions of
Pliohyrax and
Kvabebihyrax by @
ДиБгд: (Dmitry Bogdanov) are both well-executed and quite educative. The reconstruction of
Titanohyrax, here presented, however, posted 12 years ago, has aged quite a lot ; it is quite skinwrapped, with an almost complete loss of fur (a condition that is rare in most mammals of its size) and I'm not sure about some of the feet articulations (given the lack of postcranial material, these long limbs being seemingly based, with a good reasoning, on its smaller parent Antilohyrax, despite the important size difference.) Given that extinct hyracoids are not the group with the most reconstructions out there, I'd recommend keeping it on page for the time being, until a more up-to-date reconstruction is provided - the edits needed being probably too important to simply modify it.
Larrayal (
talk) 18:37, 30 April 2024 (UTC)
Already reported in Discord server, but A.C. Tatarinov (yes, again) uploaded AI-generated reconstruction of Postschizotherium and used that in Russian Wikipedia article. This is surely problematic... Ta-tea-two-te-to ( talk) 01:25, 5 May 2024 (UTC)
Hi! Wanted to put this Vasuki life reconstruction up for review... since it's only known from a few vertebrae I didn't have much to go off with, but I've tried to keep it in line with Madtsoiidae in general, taking inferences from Madtsoia and Gigantophis Ansh Saxena 7163 ( talk) 18:01, 9 May 2024 (UTC)
Those arts are added by @ Fridge Eater: without review. Are there any anatomical issues? Ta-tea-two-te-to ( talk) 02:08, 11 May 2024 (UTC)
Created life restoration of Pliodetes, lepisosteiform from Elrhaz Formation. Proportion and fin placement are based on Wenz (1999) (inaccessible, I obtained from resource exchange and shared that in discord server), and head anatomy is based on Cavin and Suteethorn (2006). [25] I already got review by User:Orthocormus but any opinions from others? Ta-tea-two-te-to ( talk) 01:27, 17 May 2024 (UTC)
Made this artwork to be included in the Tanis (fossil site) page. It was a bit challenging to guess where I should ask for advice in this piece, given there isn't much going on, but I decided to add it here for review. YellowPanda2001 ( talk) 12:45, 19 March 2024 (UTC)
Hey folks, our next Eocene European mammal, Dichodon.
Triloboii ( talk) 20:47, 23 May 2024 (UTC)
Seems that this image is added to page without review, and uploader seems to be author of the research
[26] Dan Valentin Palcu. Seems that this image origins at late 2023.
[27] Maybe it would be fine that is created by paper author himself, but there is some concerns, that first image includes multiple logos, and size chart seems to directly taken from Prehistoric Wildlife (which is already dead website, here is archive link
[28]
[29]). How should we deal that and other than that are there any issues?
Ta-tea-two-te-to (
talk) 12:45, 25 May 2024 (UTC)
I am very rusty in my knowledge of Synapsids and even more so in their anatomy, and this image is from 2017, but I gave it a little background and improvements to make it look better. Levi bernardo ( talk) 20:50, 28 May 2024 (UTC)
@ Olmagon I have fixed Daidal, do you think it is okay now? Qohelet12 ( talk) 06:08, 29 May 2024 (UTC)
Put this together for the page on this Kem Kem catfish, using the paper's reconstruction as a guide. - SlvrHwk ( talk) 07:08, 30 May 2024 (UTC)
Ok I tried to draw Meganeura as accurately as possible. Qohelet12 ( talk) 19:50, 2 June 2024 (UTC)