The best source of information used in featured dinosaur articles usually comes from the primary literature, but this can sometimes be hard to come by. The Theropod Database has a good overview of Allosaurus, specimens, and a pretty comprehensive list of papers that have been published on it that you could try looking up [1]. Good luck! Dinoguy203:09, 14 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
For things like paleobiology, I don't know of any good cites with references. You'd either have to find original papers that mention biological stuff in the title, or check out some secondary sources that provide synthesis of primary material (books like The Scientific American Book of Dinosaurs, The Dinosauria, or any good popular science books that provide references are good). Dinoguy219:38, 14 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, Dropzink
J.Spencer has nominated Thescelosaurus for Feature Article Status and it is under review right now. One reviewer has make the comment that he would like to see a dinosaur-human size comparizon chart as in the other dinosaur FAs. Since you are quite good at that and if you are not too busy, would you mind making one such diagram for Thescelosaurus? You can use image:Thescelosaurus_BW.jpg as a baseline or any other image you could find on the web. Thanks. ArthurWeasley00:12, 2 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for your kind words. Yes, I've noticed you're doing an incredible job running the spanish dinosaur wikiproject which is growing very quickly as I can see! Congratulations for all you hard work there. You want to be an astronaut? I thought you'd prefer becoming a paleontologist with all these new fascinating dinosaurs being discovered in South America! ;-) Cheers. ArthurWeasley06:33, 2 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Thescie looks fine! I've dropped a note on J.Spencer user page for comments if any. Yeah, you should always follow your dreams. Best wishes for your desire of becoming an astronaut! ArthurWeasley02:38, 3 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
As I said at Arthur's talk page, it looks good to me, and I wouldn't fiddle with the size too much at this point. I've seen specimens that may affect this, but which are unpublished. J. Spencer03:02, 3 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Dropzink, yes that image is correct, but keep in mind it is posed so that it's rearing up to survey its surroundings, and that's about as far as it could stretch (given the anatomy of the hip sockets). In a more neutral pose or if walking/running, it would be more horizontal. Dinoguy201:14, 24 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Were you still interested in making drawings of the different skulls? If so, email me, and I'll send you a scan of the best-known skulls. J. Spencer03:52, 17 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Hey Dropzink! I don't think mine are better really, maybe just a bit more colorful? ;) I use Photoshop to put them together using a bunch of templates I made with layers for the humans, grid, and background. Then I just make dinosaur 'stencils', size them according to published measurements (I try to use skull and limb measurements if possible rather than overall length since this can depend on posture), plop them into existing templates, and voila. If I can figure out a good way to do it I'll try to upload a basic template to commons at some point so other people can build on them. Dinoguy2 (talk) 00:08, 1 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Hmm, getting access to papers is always tricky. Even though I graduated, I somehow still have access to my university's online resources, which is where I get most of mine from. I downloaded the paper on Dunkleosteus bite force, in which the authors call 6m "a large individual", so I'm guessing this is toward the upper limits of credible size estimates, but I'll poke around and see if I can find any evidence of larger specimens. For right now, the best way to find papers would be to email the authors directly, or ask around on internet message boards like DinoForum. Or visit a library that might have access to journals, or keep journals in their collections, for you to make copies of. Dinoguy2 (talk) 05:07, 1 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Hmm, dunno about the Dunkle type species thing. Maybe it has something to do with the Dinichthys synonymy situation? Have to look that up. Dinoguy2 (talk) 08:50, 3 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Well, I'd say the more recent the sources the better, but I'm no expert on fossil fish... Mikko's archive seems to only list two or three species at most, depending on what's considered a synonym [2]. Dinoguy2 (talk) 20:54, 4 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Dropzink!, I'll most certainly make one! :) It will have to wait until tonight though as I'm a bit bizzy today. Thanks for the offer, Cheers! Steveoc 86 (talk) 08:44, 3 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Dropzink, here you go, You say it's for the spannish wikipedia, some of the names are written in english, should I remove those? Steveoc 86 (talk) 13:53, 4 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
If you think that this notice was placed here in error, contest the deletion by clicking on the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion," which appears inside of the speedy deletion ({{db-...}}) tag (if no such tag exists, the page is no longer a speedy delete candidate). Doing so will take you to the talk page where you will find a pre-formatted place for you to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit the the page's talk page directly to give your reasons, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, you can contact one of these administrators to request that the administrator userfy the page or email a copy to you. Sehmeet singh (talk) 12:46, 22 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The developer team at Wikimedia is making some changes to how accounts work, as part of our on-going efforts to provide new and better tools for our users like cross-wiki notifications. These changes will mean you have the same account name everywhere. This will let us give you new features that will help you edit and discuss better, and allow more flexible user permissions for tools. One of the side-effects of this is that user accounts will now have to be unique across all 900 Wikimedia wikis. See the announcement for more information.
Unfortunately, your account clashes with another account also called Dropzink. To make sure that both of you can use all Wikimedia projects in future, we have reserved the name Dropzink~enwiki that only you will have. If you like it, you don't have to do anything. If you do not like it, you can pick out a different name. If you think you might own all of the accounts with this name and this message is in error, please visit Special:MergeAccount to check and attach all of your accounts to prevent them from being renamed.
Your account will still work as before, and you will be credited for all your edits made so far, but you will have to use the new account name when you log in.
You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.
