Talk:Chindesaurus

Dead link?

I'm afraid the external link on this page may have squawked its last breath - Is anyone else still got a working link their end or do we remove it? Mistyschism 16:54, 10 April 2007 (UTC)

That's odd - it works fine for me. J. Spencer 21:22, 10 April 2007 (UTC)

Me, too. Firsfron of Ronchester 23:49, 10 April 2007 (UTC)

Huh. Doesn't work for me. Maybe the server is going up and down or something. Dinoguy2 02:25, 11 April 2007 (UTC)

Expanding this article

This article could use some expanding. Maybe add a little on the environment it lived in? Or the animals it lived with? Paleo Kid (talk) 16:15, 28 July 2010 (UTC)

Okay, here's some info that I've come up with:

-Thought to be one of the foremost predators in the Late Triassic -Known from only partial skeletons, no skull ever found. -Similarities between the pelvic and hind limbs show that it was probably closely related to Herrerasaurus.

This info came from a book, so I can't cite it. In fact, I don't even know how to. Paleo Kid (talk) 16:15, 28 July 2010 (UTC)

Okay, I've used Google translators to translate info from Spanish Wikipedia. Here it is:

Chindesaurus ( nav. "ghost or evil spirit" + gr. "lizard") was a genus of dinosaurs saurischian herrerasaurus who lived at the end of the period Triassic period , approximately between 225 to 210 million years in the Carnian and Norian in what is now North America . It was named in reference to Chinde Point , near where the specimen holotype (a skeleton partially) was discovered in the Petrified Forest National Park , Arizona , by Bryan Small in 1984 . Chindesaurus saurischian was a primitive who lived 225 million years ago during the late the Triassic . Measured between 2 and 3 meters , and was formally described by Long and Murry in 1995 . The type species , Chindesaurus bryansmalli, named after its discoverer.

In 1984, when it was found, the first press inforrmes recognized him as one prosauropod and dinosaur earlier, but none of that turned out to be. [1] This predator is probably somewhere between Staurikosaurus and Herrerasaurus , and generally puts the herrerasaurus, but not really known for a particularly good material. is considered a Triassic theropod within Herrerasauridae , Staurikosaurus brother, [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] but Bittencourt and Kellner him from this in their phylogenetic analysis of Staurikosaurus. [7] found Rauhut Chindesaurus difficult to assign a less inclusive taxon Dinosauriformes, although he and Langer believes that the ridges are shortened less than in the herrerasaurus and have similarities with crurotarsianos older than the dinosaurs. [8] Yates Chindesaurus includes an analysis sauropodomorphs phylogenetic and places as a closer to a theropod that Guaibasaurus or Agnostiphys Avepoda, that there are still tentative. [9] In 2007, Nesbitt, SJ, Irmis, RB and Parker, WG positioned him as probably dinosaur basic saurischian . [ 11 ] According to them now Chindesaurus affinities can not be verified due to the close resemblance of the parts preserved with Saturnalia and the absence of much of the skeleton. [10] Irmis et al. Chindesaurus placed within its analysis Herreerasauridae 2007 but have a small sample of the taxonomy.

I hope someone can use this info to expand the article. If you want me to, I can translate Chindesaurus from other languages. Paleo Kid (talk) 16:33, 28 July 2010 (UTC)

I have (with some parental help) replaced this old text, "...Chindesaurus was a basal saurischian..." with this new text, "...In 2007, Nesbitt, SJ, Irmis, RB and Parker, WG positioned Chindesaurus as a probable basal saurischian dinosaur,...". Yes, I the two refrences were deleted, so I can assure you that those will be back in tonight, soon. Paleo Kid (talk) 03:37, 15 August 2010 (UTC)

Image

What's wrong with this image?

If there is'nt a better one it shouldnt be removed if it isn't wrong. --Ornitholestes (talk) 13:03, 29 July 2010 (UTC)

Cool image! Wasn't that from French Wikipedia? Paleo Kid (talk) 14:51, 29 July 2010 (UTC)

No, I made the image. It has been removed but I cannot find a reason. Is it somehow wrong?--Ornitholestes (talk) 11:51, 30 July 2010 (UTC)

I don't see anything wrong with it. Paleo Kid (talk) 02:49, 31 July 2010 (UTC)

Thank you!--Ornitholestes (talk) 10:41, 2 August 2010 (UTC)

What did you base it on? I don't know much about Chindesaurus but that doesn't look like any basal theropod I've ever seen. The long arms, short legs, short straight tail and blunt snout make it look maniraptoran, kinda like those really old drawings of Deinonychus. Some aspects look downright mammalian, like the shoulder blades protruding up past the back, making it seem like it totally lacks dorsal neural spines... One foot is also twice as long as the other. MMartyniuk (talk) 07:46, 31 July 2010 (UTC)

How can you know how it looked like. Chindesaurus was not a representative early dinosaur. Have you got a better image? We should stop this discussion. --Ornitholestes (talk) 10:41, 2 August 2010 (UTC)

Hey, if you really want to get that picture up on this page, contact my dad at (Removed) and he'll send you a scan of some basal saurischian dinosaurs to back up your work. He can also get it reviewed by a local Paleontologist. (He told me to mention that he thought that your work was incredible) Paleo Kid (talk) 04:06, 15 August 2010 (UTC)

It isn't that important, but thank you for the offer. --Ornitholestes (talk) 10:38, 15 August 2010 (UTC)

under the classification section, Dr. Murry's name is misspelled. unless anyone has any objection i am correcting this asap. thank you.Ruraltexas (talk) 08:32, 10 February 2012 (UTC)ruraltexas

infobox image - FEATHERS??!?

WHOA! Why would a very early dino of THIS group show feathers or filaments?? No, no, no. 104.169.19.227 (talk) 08:04, 29 October 2019 (UTC)