Talk:Agrosaurus

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

	This article, image or category is supported by WikiProject Dinosaurs, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of dinosaurs and dinosaur-related topics. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page for more information.
Start	This article has been rated as start-Class on the quality scale.

Portal	Agrosaurus is within the scope of WikiProject Australia, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of Australia and Australia-related topics. If you would like to participate, visit the project page.
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the quality scale.
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the importance scale.
Assessment comments This article has not been rated for quality and/or importance yet. Please rate the article and then leave comments here to explain the ratings and/or to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the article.

[edit] Reassessment of Agrosaurus

Agrosaurus macgillivrayi is actually a specimen of Thecodontosaurus antiquus those type locality was mis-labeled Cape York, Australia. The source on which this assertion is based is as follows:

Vickers-Rich, P., T.H.Rich, G.C.McNamara and A.Milner 1999 Agrosaurus: Australia's Oldest Dinosaur? Records of the Western Australian Museum Suppliment No.57: 191-200

Thanks, anonymous stranger! I have made the necessary changes.--Gazzster 11:24, 31 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Thecodontosaurus and Agrosaurus

I suggest that you merge the Agrosaurus page with the Thecodontosaurus page, because the holotype of Agrosaurus macgillivrayi is a specimen of Thecodontosaurus antiquus.

I take the point, but....

I think the article ought to stay for a couple of reasons. Firstly, the name Agrosaurus enjoys a certain amount of fame, especially in Australian circles, in its own right. Someone looking up Agrosaurus would possibly be confused to be redirected to Thecodontosaurus. There is a precedent: Brontosaurus has its own article, and does not redirect to Apatosaurus. This is because the name Brontosaurus enjoys status in its own right. Secondly, the article refers to a particular fossil, albeit mislabelled. The name Agrosaurus thus refers to a particular find of significance, albeit minor, to palaeontology, particular in Australia. However, I am open to discussion. If you or any others would like to argue the point, please do so.--Gazzster 03:29, 22 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Reorientation of the Article

I rewrote the article, because I believed I was giving undue bias to the opinion that Agrosaurus macgillivrayi is synonymous with Thecodontosaurus antiquus. After reading (quite by accident) a discussion of the subject by Long (see references) I decided that the problem was quite complex. So while that opinion is probable, it needed some analysis. I feel the article needed to reflect that. Cheers all!--Gazzster 11:00, 7 December 2006 (UTC)