This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 15 | ← | Archive 17 | Archive 18 | Archive 19 | Archive 20 | Archive 21 | → | Archive 25 |
I have recently uploaded this image into the Paraeurypterus article, but was then removed due to issues regarding its acccuracy and quality. I was recommended to take it here for review if possible, and be clarified on what exact issues it has, to see if they can be changed. I based this reconstruction on pictures of the fossil itself, but given my lack of practice in reconstructing eurypterids it is feasible that I missed something important, so I would be glad if I could potentially accomodate any inputs to guarantee a more accurate approach.
Thank you, in advance.
These images are not yet reviewed, but used in several pages in both English and other languages of Wikipedia. Megalodon looks outdated, and Metoposaurus looks inaccurate as well. Shouldn't Metoposaurus have flatter body and head? And I am not sure about length of Metoposaurus, as reference used for 3 m-long Metoposaurus is from childish book (Gaines, Richard M. (2001). Coelophysis. ABDO Publishing Company. p. 16. ISBN 978-1-57765-488-9.), which is used as reference for several articles, like I already deleted but in Placerias it is used for reference of length with 3.5 m which is oversized considering skull length and proportion, I think that is another problem by the way... Ta-tea-two-te-to ( talk) 02:16, 23 May 2022 (UTC)
Well, I thought that one day reconstruction of Ptychodus should be changed, because previous reconstruction looked like benthic, unlike estimated pelagic life. Then what added to the page without review is this. (made by @ Gojira Moment:) I think head looks a bit off? Ta-tea-two-te-to ( talk) 01:44, 26 May 2022 (UTC)
oh wow- — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gojira Moment ( talk • contribs) 03:16, 28 May 2022 (UTC)
In addition to Odontogriphus... These are very nice and high quality images, and seem to be suitable for use on other languages of Wikipedia as well. Though, the problems are as follows:
@ Junnn11: and @ PaleoEquii:, other than that, are there any problems on these reconstructions? Ta-tea-two-te-to ( talk) 05:05, 7 May 2022 (UTC)
An important detail was missed in the original review: the rostral denticle labelled " Libanopristis" is not actually Libanopristis. I don't know what image the artist used, but it's definitely a rostral denticle from Onchopristis. Rostral denticles of Libanopristis are unbarbed and shaped like a kukri knife. [17] This one needs to be redrawn and the sources for all of them should be credited. Additionally, this file needs to be renamed. 4 of the 5 species depicted are not sawfishes and none of them are represented by oral teeth, but instead rostral denticles. Carnoferox ( talk) 06:27, 30 May 2022 (UTC)
I made this skeletal diagram of the newly discovered Discokeryx, and I would appreciate knowing if the proportions seem accurate. The skeletal material is based on the paper ( https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/science.abl8316) and the body silhouette is based on that of an Okapi. I included the keratinous dome on the top of the head in the silhouette. Feedback is appreciated, thanks. If it looks usable for the article, let me know please. Di (they-them) ( talk) 12:05, 3 June 2022 (UTC)
So this is a pretty blatant edit of the Dinosaur Planet Prenocephale, surely this is grounds for swift deletion on account of being most certainly violating copyright correct? Armin Reindl ( talk) 23:12, 3 June 2022 (UTC)
There is a nice skull diagram of Protorosaurus in the 2008 redescription (p. 140). It'd be nice to see it adapted and color coded to put in the article. Hemiauchenia ( talk) 07:21, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
Kelenken is currently at WP:GAN, and I will send it to WP:FAC afterwards, but the images could need a look through here first. I've modified my old restoration and one that showed up on Commons recently to match more closely how the skull would have looked in an uncrushed state. The other images are heret for good measure, and while one editor has stated they will provide a better size diagram, this hasn't happened yet, so I might have to request another one here, if anyone's up for it. FunkMonk ( talk) 16:49, 4 June 2022 (UTC)
Life restoration of an ophthalmosaurid ichthyosaur Maiaspondylus lindoei giving birth. Is this good for the article? (The model was created as part of a joint project Prehistoric Production. Direct author is Petr Menshikov). HFoxii ( talk) 16:52, 9 May 2022 (UTC)
Only reconstruction of Haplophrentis in commons looks like outdated. This study [22] shows its soft tissue and different direction of "horns", although description of that paper is on article of Haplophrentis but reconstruction is not updated. Also we should consider about this study [23] about reconstruction of hyoliths as well. @ Qohelet12: and @ PaleoEquii:, I wonder if you can help about reconstruction of this animal? Ta-tea-two-te-to ( talk) 13:25, 11 June 2022 (UTC)
A quick skull reconstruction of Kinyang mabokoensi based on the type material and articulated. Also have a version with a soft tissue silhouette however not uploaded since I'm not sure if its going to be needed (especially given the poorly preserved lower jaw). Armin Reindl ( talk) 19:39, 17 June 2022 (UTC)
Reconstruction of some of the Fauna of the Riachuelo formation i did for the wiki article, any critiques? Paleo Miguel ( talk) 01:30, 18 June 2022 (UTC)
Came across this while looking for cynodont restorations. Only the Siriusgnathus one is currently in use on the English Wikipedia. Hemiauchenia ( talk) 22:41, 19 June 2022 (UTC)
Lacks the crest at the top of the skull that is seen in more accurate reconstructions, like the one in this 2020 press release [24]. Hemiauchenia ( talk) 10:57, 28 June 2022 (UTC)
Would it be possible to make a size comparison compared to a human for Palaeoloxodon falconeri? There's some good size references with scale bars in [27] (open access, but not under CC-BY) and [28]. Hemiauchenia ( talk) 03:46, 29 June 2022 (UTC)
I've done this life restoration of the tylosaur Kaikaifilu hervei to replace the one currently used on the page, which seems to have a number of anatomical problems. While this is a highly fragmentary taxon, I've tried to keep it in line with generalized tylosaurine proportions, and have given it a layer of blubber based on the cold water temperatures of the Lopez de Bertodano Formation. Are there any issues with using this reconstruction in the article? Gasmasque ( talk) 23:09, 9 June 2022 (UTC)
Hello, I drew a group of Stanleycaris, taking into account that the body was found recently. Is it correct? Qohelet12 ( talk) 21:08, 13 July 2022 (UTC)
As Inostrancevia size chart that reviewed before (and looks like removed now), User:Alex Uchytel uploaded these reconstructions by Ukrainian paleoartist Roman Uchytel's works, who worked the study of the horn of Elasmotherium [31]. Still I am not sure that Alex Uchtel is really Roman himself, and this user looks like just working for posting Uchytel's works, saying like other person. ( Here is contribution by them) As I see these edits I wonder if these are copyvio. Ta-tea-two-te-to ( talk) 02:43, 24 June 2022 (UTC)
@ HFoxii:, as original image of Inostrancevia was deleted, I think you need to change credit of this image? (This image is added on the page of Synapsida by Fossilader, because previous image with human example is controversial.) Ta-tea-two-te-to ( talk) 04:58, 20 July 2022 (UTC)
Here's a drawing of the partial forefin of Chacaicosaurus, based mainly on the photograph in Fernández (1994) (which is admittedly not the greatest photo quality). The anatomy of the limb seems to differ notably from Fernández's own diagram of it, which is definitely interesting. How does this diagram look? I may also attempt to make a life restoration for this guy, I'm not sure if the one we currently have is all that accurate. -- Slate Weasel [ Talk - Contribs 15:08, 14 July 2022 (UTC)
Somewhat crude drawing of of the artiopod Kwanyinaspis from the Cambrian of China that I intend to create an article about. Drawn after the part type of the holotype and the diagram of such in the initial description paper available on researchgate. Hemiauchenia ( talk) 15:15, 20 July 2022 (UTC)
Why these charts haven't reviewed yet? These are Abyssal's charts that is still in use for articles, excluding ones that are already replaced. These charts would have been quite helpful in the early days, and even now they are easy to understand at first glance. The problem, however, is that these figures are not based on actual skeletal elements, they just fit Nobu Tamura's illustrations to the scales described in the page. Now I don't even know if those sizes are actually correct. Some of Nobu Tamura's work may have problems with proportions, which is not as good as a diagram based on skeletal elements. Cotylorhynchus, for example, looks much taller than that really is, because the proportion of tail length is much shorter than it actually is. Also although not in use, but new size chart of Cymbospondylus may useful, as some non-English Wiki uses this [34] inaccurate chart. Ta-tea-two-te-to ( talk) 15:35, 24 July 2022 (UTC)
This file looks like really inaccurate and confusing. Although it seems to be phylogenetically compatible to some extent, the selection of species is inconsistent, and there is no uniformity in the species used, such as current and fossil species, and it is simply confusing. This image is used in page Evolution of fish which page itself needs huge update, and I deleted that image, however @ Epipelagic: added this again. The caption does indicate that it is "obsolete," but no clear source is given that it was once shown that sponges evolved into sea anemones, and sea anemones evolved into Kinorhyncha. To be honest, I don't see any merit in keeping this image that way.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Ta-tea-two-te-to ( talk • contribs) 2:34, 31 July 2022 (UTC)
I'm still really not all that knowledgeable about mosasaurs, but hopefully this recon is fine to use in the article. Is there anything I should change about it? Gasmasque ( talk) 20:12, 31 July 2022 (UTC)
This reconstruction looks like really outdated. Compared to this skeletal reconstruction [36] (be careful, that figure looks like mistook scale bar, actually likely to be 5 cm), limbs are too short and too crocodile-like, also possibly tail is too long although not all is preserved. Ta-tea-two-te-to ( talk) 15:52, 28 July 2022 (UTC)
Here is a life restoration of the recently described pliosaurid Eardasaurus powelli. Are there any problems? HFoxii ( talk) 05:33, 5 August 2022 (UTC)
I made this image shows two different interpretation of Pahvantia from images in Commons, is that look accurate, @ Junnn11: and @ PaleoEquii:? Ta-tea-two-te-to ( talk) 05:46, 6 August 2022 (UTC)
It seems that huge swathes of our ichthyopterygian restorations haven't been reviewed, so I'm posting all of our in-use Triassic ones here yet to receive a review. I've already noted some issues in their captions; how do the others look? -- Slate Weasel [ Talk - Contribs 18:50, 28 May 2022 (UTC)
Diagram of of bone movements between joints in mosasaur skulls, specifically showing the differences between a typical mosasaur (Tylosaurus as random example) and the really evolved Plotosaurus. Looking to see if cranial movements are accurate. Sources are Russell (1967) [47] pg 60-65 and LeBlanc et al. (2013) [48] pg 195-244. Macrophyseter | talk 06:58, 7 August 2022 (UTC)
Over the last decade, there has been a revolution in the systematics of "microsaurs", with most modern studies now considering microsaurs belonging to the clade Recumbirostra to now be early diverging sauropsid amniotes rather than reptiliomorphs, and to have had a burrowing (fossorial) lifestyle rather than being aquatic. That means that these images are now outdated. I think the skin covering is generally okay, as the visibility of scales is up to artistic license. Hemiauchenia ( talk) 19:35, 28 July 2022 (UTC)
This restoration is clearly traced from a Jurassic World Dimorphodon promotional image. The skull is also too short for a scaphognathine. Miracusaurs ( talk) 16:00, 30 July 2022 (UTC)
This user once reviewed reconstruction of Gemuendina and Liaoconodon, but after that they continue to add reconstruction without review. I deleted Nochelaspis, Clymenia, anaspidomorphs, as these look clearly inaccurate. Now this user added reconstruction of Galeaspida, what do you think of that? Ta-tea-two-te-to ( talk) 03:33, 8 August 2022 (UTC)
Is it possible to create a skull diagram of Orovenator? There's a good reconstruction in Ford and Benson (2019) [52] (freely accessible through the Wikipedia Library). Hemiauchenia ( talk) 21:49, 6 August 2022 (UTC)
It just occurred to me that none of our Quetzalcoatlus images have been reviewed, so in light of the redescription, here they are (excluding obviously inaccurate ones). FunkMonk ( talk) 01:37, 10 August 2022 (UTC)
There is also this one [53] by NT which hasn't been uploaded yet, worth it? FunkMonk ( talk) 01:37, 10 August 2022 (UTC)
Hello. Here are some reconstructions of almost all known priapulids from the Chengjiang, excluding Selkirkia. I made them quickly so if there are any errors, feel free to discard them. PaleoEquii ( talk) 22:15, 15 August 2022 (UTC)
Hello, I've illustrated a life reconstruction of Bisticeratops, is this suitable for the article? Sauriazoicillus ( talk) 14:45, 16 August 2022 (UTC)
I'm not sure how much is known of Gyrosteus, as I can't find an open access copy of Woodward's 1889 description [55], but based on skeletons of other members of Chondrosteidae I've seen, the appearance looks too sturgeon-like. In particular, the flank scutes seem to a unique feature to sturgeons and not shared with other Acipenseriformes, and their position on the body looks like they may have been a misinterpretation of the spinal column. Hemiauchenia ( talk) 18:39, 13 August 2022 (UTC)
other than perhaps fishboy's one that you mentionbecause you mentioned it in your tweet https://twitter.com/fishboy86164577/status/1550786664280125440 that it's for that publication. Also, given the mouth posture in your restoration, are chondrosteids thought to have been suspension feeders or macropredators? I can't find any comments on their ecology in the literature. Hemiauchenia ( talk) 10:41, 17 August 2022 (UTC)
I'm requesting an image to go on the page Tyrannasorus rex. Photographs as well as illustrations of the holotype specimen can be found in this paper for reference. https://digitalcommons.unl.edu/entomologypapers/46/ Di (they-them) ( talk) 02:55, 19 August 2022 (UTC)
In the theme of our Early Jurassic edit-a-thon, here are a couple more ichthyosaurs. I've updated the Hauffiopteryx from the original version, and am planning on coloring it soon; additionally, I've finally finished and uploaded the WIP of Excalibosaurus I'd been alluding to on the Discord server. Thoughts on these two? I may also try to fix the teeth on my Eurhinosaurus and upload that (or maybe (finally) color my Cymbospondylus... or just totally fail to do either in my currently limited time frame.) -- Slate Weasel [ Talk - Contribs 14:21, 13 August 2022 (UTC)
Hi! A discussion started on the WP:Discord Wikimedia Commons channel and it was recommended to move it here. user:Magnatyrannus and user:Larrayal pointed out that sources indicate that the bipedal posture is unrepresentative, so I used file:Gigantopithecus.png to swap in a quadrupedal stance instead. The results can be seen here: https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/222346047547113474/1010283591521022012/Gigantopithecus_v_human_v1.svg As this would be my first paleoart edit, I am eager to hear if I have stepped in any of the usual pitfalls or made other errors. Thank you. Arlo James Barnes 20:42, 19 August 2022 (UTC)
Is it possible to create a size chart for the Jurassic nodosaurid Mymoorapelta? I'm trying to get its page updated and expanded, but it lacks a good size chart. Most of the material has not been fully described but there is a skeletal by Henry Sharpe that was posted on Twitter. The anatomy of the animal is very similar to that of Gargoyleosaurus, which already has a size chart. Augustios_Paleo ( talk) 23:05, 9 August 2022 (EDT)
While checking some stuff in preparation for a larger edit to the Dow's Puffin page, I noticed that the copyright information on this piece is less than reassuring. The artist is only credited as "unknown" while giving the vague "internet" as the sole source. After a little digging and matching the signature, it seems the image was taken from the website Ornitofrenia by Polish artist Piotr Gryz. According to the website all rights are reserved and with the incredibly vague copyright info on the upload I am surprised this wasn't caught earlier (unless of course i'm missing something here). This is ESPECIALLY concerning given the fact that the image is used across multiple pages not just on English Wikipedia but also on Wikidata and foreign language wikipedia pages. Still, as I am not exactly experienced with the matter and execution (nor do I want to rush too quickly to deletion in case I am missing something someone else might now) I thought I should first bring it up here and leave deletion notices to someone else. Armin Reindl ( talk) 14:50, 22 August 2022 (UTC)
This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 15 | ← | Archive 17 | Archive 18 | Archive 19 | Archive 20 | Archive 21 | → | Archive 25 |
I have recently uploaded this image into the Paraeurypterus article, but was then removed due to issues regarding its acccuracy and quality. I was recommended to take it here for review if possible, and be clarified on what exact issues it has, to see if they can be changed. I based this reconstruction on pictures of the fossil itself, but given my lack of practice in reconstructing eurypterids it is feasible that I missed something important, so I would be glad if I could potentially accomodate any inputs to guarantee a more accurate approach.
Thank you, in advance.
These images are not yet reviewed, but used in several pages in both English and other languages of Wikipedia. Megalodon looks outdated, and Metoposaurus looks inaccurate as well. Shouldn't Metoposaurus have flatter body and head? And I am not sure about length of Metoposaurus, as reference used for 3 m-long Metoposaurus is from childish book (Gaines, Richard M. (2001). Coelophysis. ABDO Publishing Company. p. 16. ISBN 978-1-57765-488-9.), which is used as reference for several articles, like I already deleted but in Placerias it is used for reference of length with 3.5 m which is oversized considering skull length and proportion, I think that is another problem by the way... Ta-tea-two-te-to ( talk) 02:16, 23 May 2022 (UTC)
Well, I thought that one day reconstruction of Ptychodus should be changed, because previous reconstruction looked like benthic, unlike estimated pelagic life. Then what added to the page without review is this. (made by @ Gojira Moment:) I think head looks a bit off? Ta-tea-two-te-to ( talk) 01:44, 26 May 2022 (UTC)
oh wow- — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gojira Moment ( talk • contribs) 03:16, 28 May 2022 (UTC)
In addition to Odontogriphus... These are very nice and high quality images, and seem to be suitable for use on other languages of Wikipedia as well. Though, the problems are as follows:
@ Junnn11: and @ PaleoEquii:, other than that, are there any problems on these reconstructions? Ta-tea-two-te-to ( talk) 05:05, 7 May 2022 (UTC)
An important detail was missed in the original review: the rostral denticle labelled " Libanopristis" is not actually Libanopristis. I don't know what image the artist used, but it's definitely a rostral denticle from Onchopristis. Rostral denticles of Libanopristis are unbarbed and shaped like a kukri knife. [17] This one needs to be redrawn and the sources for all of them should be credited. Additionally, this file needs to be renamed. 4 of the 5 species depicted are not sawfishes and none of them are represented by oral teeth, but instead rostral denticles. Carnoferox ( talk) 06:27, 30 May 2022 (UTC)
I made this skeletal diagram of the newly discovered Discokeryx, and I would appreciate knowing if the proportions seem accurate. The skeletal material is based on the paper ( https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/science.abl8316) and the body silhouette is based on that of an Okapi. I included the keratinous dome on the top of the head in the silhouette. Feedback is appreciated, thanks. If it looks usable for the article, let me know please. Di (they-them) ( talk) 12:05, 3 June 2022 (UTC)
So this is a pretty blatant edit of the Dinosaur Planet Prenocephale, surely this is grounds for swift deletion on account of being most certainly violating copyright correct? Armin Reindl ( talk) 23:12, 3 June 2022 (UTC)
There is a nice skull diagram of Protorosaurus in the 2008 redescription (p. 140). It'd be nice to see it adapted and color coded to put in the article. Hemiauchenia ( talk) 07:21, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
Kelenken is currently at WP:GAN, and I will send it to WP:FAC afterwards, but the images could need a look through here first. I've modified my old restoration and one that showed up on Commons recently to match more closely how the skull would have looked in an uncrushed state. The other images are heret for good measure, and while one editor has stated they will provide a better size diagram, this hasn't happened yet, so I might have to request another one here, if anyone's up for it. FunkMonk ( talk) 16:49, 4 June 2022 (UTC)
Life restoration of an ophthalmosaurid ichthyosaur Maiaspondylus lindoei giving birth. Is this good for the article? (The model was created as part of a joint project Prehistoric Production. Direct author is Petr Menshikov). HFoxii ( talk) 16:52, 9 May 2022 (UTC)
Only reconstruction of Haplophrentis in commons looks like outdated. This study [22] shows its soft tissue and different direction of "horns", although description of that paper is on article of Haplophrentis but reconstruction is not updated. Also we should consider about this study [23] about reconstruction of hyoliths as well. @ Qohelet12: and @ PaleoEquii:, I wonder if you can help about reconstruction of this animal? Ta-tea-two-te-to ( talk) 13:25, 11 June 2022 (UTC)
A quick skull reconstruction of Kinyang mabokoensi based on the type material and articulated. Also have a version with a soft tissue silhouette however not uploaded since I'm not sure if its going to be needed (especially given the poorly preserved lower jaw). Armin Reindl ( talk) 19:39, 17 June 2022 (UTC)
Reconstruction of some of the Fauna of the Riachuelo formation i did for the wiki article, any critiques? Paleo Miguel ( talk) 01:30, 18 June 2022 (UTC)
Came across this while looking for cynodont restorations. Only the Siriusgnathus one is currently in use on the English Wikipedia. Hemiauchenia ( talk) 22:41, 19 June 2022 (UTC)
Lacks the crest at the top of the skull that is seen in more accurate reconstructions, like the one in this 2020 press release [24]. Hemiauchenia ( talk) 10:57, 28 June 2022 (UTC)
Would it be possible to make a size comparison compared to a human for Palaeoloxodon falconeri? There's some good size references with scale bars in [27] (open access, but not under CC-BY) and [28]. Hemiauchenia ( talk) 03:46, 29 June 2022 (UTC)
I've done this life restoration of the tylosaur Kaikaifilu hervei to replace the one currently used on the page, which seems to have a number of anatomical problems. While this is a highly fragmentary taxon, I've tried to keep it in line with generalized tylosaurine proportions, and have given it a layer of blubber based on the cold water temperatures of the Lopez de Bertodano Formation. Are there any issues with using this reconstruction in the article? Gasmasque ( talk) 23:09, 9 June 2022 (UTC)
Hello, I drew a group of Stanleycaris, taking into account that the body was found recently. Is it correct? Qohelet12 ( talk) 21:08, 13 July 2022 (UTC)
As Inostrancevia size chart that reviewed before (and looks like removed now), User:Alex Uchytel uploaded these reconstructions by Ukrainian paleoartist Roman Uchytel's works, who worked the study of the horn of Elasmotherium [31]. Still I am not sure that Alex Uchtel is really Roman himself, and this user looks like just working for posting Uchytel's works, saying like other person. ( Here is contribution by them) As I see these edits I wonder if these are copyvio. Ta-tea-two-te-to ( talk) 02:43, 24 June 2022 (UTC)
@ HFoxii:, as original image of Inostrancevia was deleted, I think you need to change credit of this image? (This image is added on the page of Synapsida by Fossilader, because previous image with human example is controversial.) Ta-tea-two-te-to ( talk) 04:58, 20 July 2022 (UTC)
Here's a drawing of the partial forefin of Chacaicosaurus, based mainly on the photograph in Fernández (1994) (which is admittedly not the greatest photo quality). The anatomy of the limb seems to differ notably from Fernández's own diagram of it, which is definitely interesting. How does this diagram look? I may also attempt to make a life restoration for this guy, I'm not sure if the one we currently have is all that accurate. -- Slate Weasel [ Talk - Contribs 15:08, 14 July 2022 (UTC)
Somewhat crude drawing of of the artiopod Kwanyinaspis from the Cambrian of China that I intend to create an article about. Drawn after the part type of the holotype and the diagram of such in the initial description paper available on researchgate. Hemiauchenia ( talk) 15:15, 20 July 2022 (UTC)
Why these charts haven't reviewed yet? These are Abyssal's charts that is still in use for articles, excluding ones that are already replaced. These charts would have been quite helpful in the early days, and even now they are easy to understand at first glance. The problem, however, is that these figures are not based on actual skeletal elements, they just fit Nobu Tamura's illustrations to the scales described in the page. Now I don't even know if those sizes are actually correct. Some of Nobu Tamura's work may have problems with proportions, which is not as good as a diagram based on skeletal elements. Cotylorhynchus, for example, looks much taller than that really is, because the proportion of tail length is much shorter than it actually is. Also although not in use, but new size chart of Cymbospondylus may useful, as some non-English Wiki uses this [34] inaccurate chart. Ta-tea-two-te-to ( talk) 15:35, 24 July 2022 (UTC)
This file looks like really inaccurate and confusing. Although it seems to be phylogenetically compatible to some extent, the selection of species is inconsistent, and there is no uniformity in the species used, such as current and fossil species, and it is simply confusing. This image is used in page Evolution of fish which page itself needs huge update, and I deleted that image, however @ Epipelagic: added this again. The caption does indicate that it is "obsolete," but no clear source is given that it was once shown that sponges evolved into sea anemones, and sea anemones evolved into Kinorhyncha. To be honest, I don't see any merit in keeping this image that way.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Ta-tea-two-te-to ( talk • contribs) 2:34, 31 July 2022 (UTC)
I'm still really not all that knowledgeable about mosasaurs, but hopefully this recon is fine to use in the article. Is there anything I should change about it? Gasmasque ( talk) 20:12, 31 July 2022 (UTC)
This reconstruction looks like really outdated. Compared to this skeletal reconstruction [36] (be careful, that figure looks like mistook scale bar, actually likely to be 5 cm), limbs are too short and too crocodile-like, also possibly tail is too long although not all is preserved. Ta-tea-two-te-to ( talk) 15:52, 28 July 2022 (UTC)
Here is a life restoration of the recently described pliosaurid Eardasaurus powelli. Are there any problems? HFoxii ( talk) 05:33, 5 August 2022 (UTC)
I made this image shows two different interpretation of Pahvantia from images in Commons, is that look accurate, @ Junnn11: and @ PaleoEquii:? Ta-tea-two-te-to ( talk) 05:46, 6 August 2022 (UTC)
It seems that huge swathes of our ichthyopterygian restorations haven't been reviewed, so I'm posting all of our in-use Triassic ones here yet to receive a review. I've already noted some issues in their captions; how do the others look? -- Slate Weasel [ Talk - Contribs 18:50, 28 May 2022 (UTC)
Diagram of of bone movements between joints in mosasaur skulls, specifically showing the differences between a typical mosasaur (Tylosaurus as random example) and the really evolved Plotosaurus. Looking to see if cranial movements are accurate. Sources are Russell (1967) [47] pg 60-65 and LeBlanc et al. (2013) [48] pg 195-244. Macrophyseter | talk 06:58, 7 August 2022 (UTC)
Over the last decade, there has been a revolution in the systematics of "microsaurs", with most modern studies now considering microsaurs belonging to the clade Recumbirostra to now be early diverging sauropsid amniotes rather than reptiliomorphs, and to have had a burrowing (fossorial) lifestyle rather than being aquatic. That means that these images are now outdated. I think the skin covering is generally okay, as the visibility of scales is up to artistic license. Hemiauchenia ( talk) 19:35, 28 July 2022 (UTC)
This restoration is clearly traced from a Jurassic World Dimorphodon promotional image. The skull is also too short for a scaphognathine. Miracusaurs ( talk) 16:00, 30 July 2022 (UTC)
This user once reviewed reconstruction of Gemuendina and Liaoconodon, but after that they continue to add reconstruction without review. I deleted Nochelaspis, Clymenia, anaspidomorphs, as these look clearly inaccurate. Now this user added reconstruction of Galeaspida, what do you think of that? Ta-tea-two-te-to ( talk) 03:33, 8 August 2022 (UTC)
Is it possible to create a skull diagram of Orovenator? There's a good reconstruction in Ford and Benson (2019) [52] (freely accessible through the Wikipedia Library). Hemiauchenia ( talk) 21:49, 6 August 2022 (UTC)
It just occurred to me that none of our Quetzalcoatlus images have been reviewed, so in light of the redescription, here they are (excluding obviously inaccurate ones). FunkMonk ( talk) 01:37, 10 August 2022 (UTC)
There is also this one [53] by NT which hasn't been uploaded yet, worth it? FunkMonk ( talk) 01:37, 10 August 2022 (UTC)
Hello. Here are some reconstructions of almost all known priapulids from the Chengjiang, excluding Selkirkia. I made them quickly so if there are any errors, feel free to discard them. PaleoEquii ( talk) 22:15, 15 August 2022 (UTC)
Hello, I've illustrated a life reconstruction of Bisticeratops, is this suitable for the article? Sauriazoicillus ( talk) 14:45, 16 August 2022 (UTC)
I'm not sure how much is known of Gyrosteus, as I can't find an open access copy of Woodward's 1889 description [55], but based on skeletons of other members of Chondrosteidae I've seen, the appearance looks too sturgeon-like. In particular, the flank scutes seem to a unique feature to sturgeons and not shared with other Acipenseriformes, and their position on the body looks like they may have been a misinterpretation of the spinal column. Hemiauchenia ( talk) 18:39, 13 August 2022 (UTC)
other than perhaps fishboy's one that you mentionbecause you mentioned it in your tweet https://twitter.com/fishboy86164577/status/1550786664280125440 that it's for that publication. Also, given the mouth posture in your restoration, are chondrosteids thought to have been suspension feeders or macropredators? I can't find any comments on their ecology in the literature. Hemiauchenia ( talk) 10:41, 17 August 2022 (UTC)
I'm requesting an image to go on the page Tyrannasorus rex. Photographs as well as illustrations of the holotype specimen can be found in this paper for reference. https://digitalcommons.unl.edu/entomologypapers/46/ Di (they-them) ( talk) 02:55, 19 August 2022 (UTC)
In the theme of our Early Jurassic edit-a-thon, here are a couple more ichthyosaurs. I've updated the Hauffiopteryx from the original version, and am planning on coloring it soon; additionally, I've finally finished and uploaded the WIP of Excalibosaurus I'd been alluding to on the Discord server. Thoughts on these two? I may also try to fix the teeth on my Eurhinosaurus and upload that (or maybe (finally) color my Cymbospondylus... or just totally fail to do either in my currently limited time frame.) -- Slate Weasel [ Talk - Contribs 14:21, 13 August 2022 (UTC)
Hi! A discussion started on the WP:Discord Wikimedia Commons channel and it was recommended to move it here. user:Magnatyrannus and user:Larrayal pointed out that sources indicate that the bipedal posture is unrepresentative, so I used file:Gigantopithecus.png to swap in a quadrupedal stance instead. The results can be seen here: https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/222346047547113474/1010283591521022012/Gigantopithecus_v_human_v1.svg As this would be my first paleoart edit, I am eager to hear if I have stepped in any of the usual pitfalls or made other errors. Thank you. Arlo James Barnes 20:42, 19 August 2022 (UTC)
Is it possible to create a size chart for the Jurassic nodosaurid Mymoorapelta? I'm trying to get its page updated and expanded, but it lacks a good size chart. Most of the material has not been fully described but there is a skeletal by Henry Sharpe that was posted on Twitter. The anatomy of the animal is very similar to that of Gargoyleosaurus, which already has a size chart. Augustios_Paleo ( talk) 23:05, 9 August 2022 (EDT)
While checking some stuff in preparation for a larger edit to the Dow's Puffin page, I noticed that the copyright information on this piece is less than reassuring. The artist is only credited as "unknown" while giving the vague "internet" as the sole source. After a little digging and matching the signature, it seems the image was taken from the website Ornitofrenia by Polish artist Piotr Gryz. According to the website all rights are reserved and with the incredibly vague copyright info on the upload I am surprised this wasn't caught earlier (unless of course i'm missing something here). This is ESPECIALLY concerning given the fact that the image is used across multiple pages not just on English Wikipedia but also on Wikidata and foreign language wikipedia pages. Still, as I am not exactly experienced with the matter and execution (nor do I want to rush too quickly to deletion in case I am missing something someone else might now) I thought I should first bring it up here and leave deletion notices to someone else. Armin Reindl ( talk) 14:50, 22 August 2022 (UTC)