Talk:Ceratopsidae

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article is supported by WikiProject Dinosaurs, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of dinosaurs. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page for more information.

Ceratopsidae is either included in the 2006 Wikipedia CD Selection or is a candidate for inclusion in the next version (the project page is at WPCD Selection). Please maintain high quality standards, and if possible stick to GFDL and GFDL-compatible images.

Please take a look at the picture. I downloaded it from stock.exchng, and the caption there says: Torosaurus. A real torosaurus skull however has two large holes in the frill. So, could anyone tell us whether this is a Triceratops or some other dino. Still it's a cool pic, showing its nice frill. — Phlebas 20:23, 29 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Your doubts were justified: it's indeed a Triceratops :o).--MWAK 10:15, 20 August 2005 (UTC)

Contents 1 Arrangement 2 controversies and issues 3 Chasmosaurinae vs Ceratopsinae 4 descriptions of subfamilies and tribes

[edit] Arrangement

I've cleaned up the taxonmoy section's arrangement. It looks like some sort of hierarchy was being idicated, but there was no explanation. It certainly was not an evolutionary sequence. Anyway, it looks better without the staggarding. CFLeon 06:24, 28 April 2006 (UTC)

Could be leftover from my early attempts at these taxonomies. I agree staggaring should only happen if preceeded by a valid taxon name.Dinoguy2 19:39, 28 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] controversies and issues

Is it worth having a heading touching on controversies here eg. validity of Monoclonius and Brachyceratops (immature form of........what?), Agathaumas & Ceratops here or leave them on their respective pages? Cas Liber 09:26, 29 May 2006 (UTC)

I think those issues should be discussed on the more specific pages for individual genera. This page should discuss ceratopsians in general.Dinoguy2 17:07, 29 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Chasmosaurinae vs Ceratopsinae

AFAIK, Lambe named the two subfamilies in 1915 Chasmosaurinae and Centrosaurinae. Why is it now Ceratopsinae? I wasn't aware of higher classifications automatically following on from their most senior genus. Cas Liber 09:53, 31 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] descriptions of subfamilies and tribes

I guess it makes sense to have the subfamilies and tribes discussed at the end of this page rather than hive off to separate pages?Cas Liber 10:27, 31 May 2006 (UTC)