Talk:Cryptoclidus

	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
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Amphibians and Reptiles Mid‑importance

	Cryptoclidus 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.

Quick work! Page looks loads better like that. I'm a bit concerned about the dino stub tag, tho', as this beast is/was not a dinosaur. - Ballista 21:18, 21 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, I didn't know it wasn't a dinosaur. When someone removed the dinosaur tag and replaced it with the reptile tag I asked why and never got any response, so I replaced it. ONUnicorn 13:32, 22 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Turns out I did get a response, just didn't notice it. ONUnicorn 13:33, 22 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, so you miss messages, too, eh? - Ballista 13:45, 22 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hmm, looks like the image here is Nessie and not a real plesiosaur after all. See the last paragraph here [1] Dinoguy2 (talk) 07:00, 21 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

File:Cryptoclidus.jpg Nominated for Deletion

An image used in this article, File:Cryptoclidus.jpg, has been nominated for deletion at Wikimedia Commons in the following category: Deletion requests April 2012

What should I do?

Don't panic; a discussion will now take place over on Commons about whether to remove the file. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion, although please review Commons guidelines before doing so.

If the image is non-free then you may need to upload it to Wikipedia (Commons does not allow fair use)
If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale then it cannot be uploaded or used.

To take part in any discussion, or to review a more detailed deletion rationale please visit the relevant image page (File:Cryptoclidus.jpg)

This is Bot placed notification, another user has nominated/tagged the image --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 18:53, 11 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Species list

For more info on the taxonomic history of Cryptoclidus and its constituent species, see Brown (1981).

Brown, David S.; 1981. The English Upper Jurassic Plesiosauroidea (Reptilia) and a review of the phylogeny and classification of the Plesiosauria; Bulletin of the British Museum (Natural History), Geology; 35(4) pp.253-347. 83.206.236.228 (talk) 20:38, 28 June 2012 (UTC)Vahe Demirjian[reply]

Orphaned references in Cryptoclidus

I check pages listed in Category:Pages with incorrect ref formatting to try to fix reference errors. One of the things I do is look for content for orphaned references in wikilinked articles. I have found content for some of Cryptoclidus's orphans, the problem is that I found more than one version. I can't determine which (if any) is correct for this article, so I am asking for a sentient editor to look it over and copy the correct ref content into this article.

Reference named "Bensonetal12":

From Anningasaura: Benson, R. B. J.; Evans, M.; Druckenmiller, P. S. (2012). Lalueza-Fox, Carles (ed.). "High Diversity, Low Disparity and Small Body Size in Plesiosaurs (Reptilia, Sauropterygia) from the Triassic–Jurassic Boundary". PLoS ONE. 7 (3): e31838. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0031838. PMC 3306369. PMID 22438869.{{cite journal}}: CS1 maint: unflagged free DOI (link)
From Meyerasaurus: "High Diversity, Low Disparity and Small Body Size in Plesiosaurs (Reptilia, Sauropterygia) from the Triassic–Jurassic Boundary". PLoS ONE. 7 (3): e31838. 2012. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0031838. PMC 3306369. PMID 22438869. {{cite journal}}: Unknown parameter |authors= ignored (help)CS1 maint: unflagged free DOI (link)
From Plesiosauria: Roger B. J. Benson, Mark Evans and Patrick S. Druckenmiller (2012). Lalueza-Fox, Carles (ed.). "High Diversity, Low Disparity and Small Body Size in Plesiosaurs (Reptilia, Sauropterygia) from the Triassic–Jurassic Boundary". PLoS ONE. 7 (3): e31838. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0031838. PMC 3306369. PMID 22438869.{{cite journal}}: CS1 maint: unflagged free DOI (link)

I apologize if any of the above are effectively identical; I am just a simple computer program, so I can't determine whether minor differences are significant or not. AnomieBOT ⚡ 16:01, 13 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Size

Was Cryptoclidus really 8 metres? I thought it was 5 metres. Also wouldn't an 8 metre Cryptoclidus weigh only 1.5 tonnes since it is over half the length of a 14 metre Elasmosaurus, which weighs 3-4 tonnes? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 112.135.58.111 (talk) 12:38, 6 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Cryptoclidus was 8m. Elasmosaurus was only 2t. Yes, the weight was uncited and unknown where does it comes from. You can delete it if you like, but I wouldn't. Dinosaur Fan (talk) 08:00, 10 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, sorry I don't know which templates to use or anything, but I would just like to point out that you have a picture saying cryptoclidus was 8m long and then right next to it text saying it is 3m long, it is quite confusing so I am just informing you. Thanks

Cryptoclidus being 8m and 8t comes from Walking with dinosaurs, not reliable, 3m came from a website about plesiosaurs maintained by Dr. Adam Smith, the website is still online and was most recently updated last April, I have no idea why the citation was removed under the explanation of "defunct website". Mike.BRZ (talk) 21:03, 2 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Cryptoclidus. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080918220040/http://www.dinosauria.com/dml/names/ples.html to http://www.dinosauria.com/dml/names/ples.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 02:20, 3 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Image Moving to Wrong Section

For some reason when I added an image to the Paleobiology section it was pushed down to the Classification section, but I see no reason for this phenomenon. Could someone try to find out why this happened and fix it? Thanks. --Slate Weasel (talk | contribs) 01:05, 8 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, it's because a picture that is on an "earlier level" has been pushed past the new picture you added by the taxobox. So your new image gets pushed below the upper image. FunkMonk (talk) 08:32, 9 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]