Talk:Anurognathus

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Anurognathus article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Palaeontology: Pterosaurs Mid‑importance

	Paleontology portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Palaeontology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of palaeontology-related topics and create a standardized, informative, comprehensive and easy-to-use resource on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PalaeontologyWikipedia:WikiProject PalaeontologyTemplate:WikiProject PalaeontologyPalaeontology articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by the Pterosaurs task force (assessed as Mid-importance).

Amphibians and Reptiles Mid‑importance

	Anurognathus is part of WikiProject Amphibians and Reptiles, an effort to make Wikipedia a standardized, informative, comprehensive and easy-to-use resource for amphibians and reptiles. If you would like to participate, you can choose to edit this article, or visit the project page for more information.Amphibians and ReptilesWikipedia:WikiProject Amphibians and ReptilesTemplate:WikiProject Amphibians and Reptilesamphibian and reptile articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Untitled

This article is fairly accurat and I put a reference in too verifyEnlil Ninlil 03:34, 21 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Eye position

Where was the eyes placed? On most reconstructions I've seen, the eyes are small and behind the biggest hole in the skull, don't know what it's called, like here:[1][2]. But DiBgd has drawn it with the eye in the biggest hole, while using this as reference:[3] So eh, which one is correct? FunkMonk (talk) 17:46, 8 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

DiBgd looks correct, using the Bennett skull. The skull of Anurognathus was only known as squashed, incomplete specimens until recently, and it's a weird-looking skull. The antorbital fenestra is actually small and shifted to the front in a very wide, short skull. J. Spencer (talk) 15:07, 14 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ah ok. That would probably be nice to have mentioned in the article somehow... FunkMonk (talk) 15:17, 14 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It looks like the specimen is published, but it's in one of the German journals that don't get out my way very often. J. Spencer (talk) 15:21, 14 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Etymology

The article states that the name means "without tail jaw", "in reference to its unusually small tail relative to other "rhamphorhynchoid" (i.e. basal) pterosaurs", and cites a popular encyclopedia. Will have to track down the original paper, but surely, this was named in reference to Anura due to the similarity of the skull with a frog...? Dinoguy2 (talk) 22:51, 27 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I agree; compare the closely related genus Batrachognathus. And the ref cited for that claim doesn't say anything about why it's called Anurognathus; all the ref says is that the Latin means "tailless jaw," end of story. So I'll fix the article. --Quuxplusone (talk) 03:46, 24 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Accuracy

I have a book, Michael Benton’s Dinosaurs: New Visions of a Lost World, which depicts Anuroghathus quite differently, much more bat-like. I feel that this inaccuracy should be mentioned on this page and any page it is used on, thought i doubt said book is enough of a citation. I’ve removed the image for nowMRN2electricboogaloo (talk) 01:40, 25 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

There is quite a bit of leeway in how to depict most prehistoric animals, so one restoration looking different doesn't mean the one we have is inaccurate, and I'll put it back. This restoration shows hair-like covering as well, which is bat-like already. FunkMonk (talk) 11:56, 24 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]