Talk:Leptocleidus

A fact from Leptocleidus appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know column on 9 September 2007. The text of the entry was as follows:

Did you know... that unlike most plesiosaurs, Leptocleidus once lived in shallow lagoon environments and likely visited brackish and fresh water systems such as the mouths of rivers?

A record of the entry may be seen at Wikipedia:Recent additions/2007/September.

Wikipedia

Amphibians and Reptiles Low‑importance

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

Palaeontology Low‑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
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Orphaned references in Leptocleidus

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 Leptocleidus'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 "Marmornectes":

From Trinacromerum: "A new pliosaurid (Sauropterygia, Plesiosauria) from the Oxford Clay Formation (Middle Jurassic, Callovian) of England: evidence for a gracile, longirostrine grade of Early-Middle Jurassic pliosaurids". Special Papers in Palaeontology. 86: 109–129. 2011. doi:10.1111/j.1475-4983.2011.01083.x. {{cite journal}}: Unknown parameter |authors= ignored (help)
From Seeleyosaurus: doi: 10.5061/dryad.p71fk/1
From Plesiosauria: Hilary F. Ketchum and Roger B. J. Benson (2011). "A new pliosaurid (Sauropterygia, Plesiosauria) from the Oxford Clay Formation (Middle Jurassic, Callovian) of England: evidence for a gracile, longirostrine grade of Early-Middle Jurassic pliosaurids". Special Papers in Palaeontology. 86: 109–129. doi:10.1111/j.1475-4983.2011.01083.x.

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 ⚡ 15:41, 13 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Leptocleidus sp.: Vectocleidus?

Is the suposed Leptocleidus sp. illustrated and listed here as being from the Vectis Formation perhaps what later became Vectocleidus? Pinging MWAK, as usual when I hit a wall... Also mentioned on this site:[1] FunkMonk (talk) 22:09, 8 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Indeed, the "Leptocleidus sp." mentioned on the Dinowight site is Vectocleidus. Whether the illustration is in any way based on its material is highly doubtful, however. It says that it is based on L. capensis. No skull material is known.--MWAK (talk) 22:43, 8 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

So at least we should remove mention of the Isle of Wight from this article, no? FunkMonk (talk) 22:47, 8 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Well, to avoid confusion, we could indicate that it is now known as Vectocleidus.--MWAK (talk) 06:10, 9 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Good move! A bit irritating that we don't know what that sp. restoration is supposed to depict... FunkMonk (talk) 08:36, 9 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Checking the notes from the image's author, he says its mostly based on L. capensis. So i guess good news is that the image can stay... bad news is that Vectocleidus is still unillustrated. Ryan shell (talk) 12:58, 9 May 2017 (UTC) ps) it would also be cool if we can edit Vectocleidus into the cladogram here to better illustrate the evolutionary relationships of both genera on their own articles -I don't have access to the paper right now though.[reply]

My impression is that it is supposed to depict either the Isle of Wight or Australian sp. (since both have been referred to as Leptocleidus sp.), but if we really want to know, we can email the artist about it... And yeah, if someone can make a cladogram based on the Vectocleidus paper, that would be nice, but I am really bad at those... FunkMonk (talk) 13:32, 9 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah me too, I'm working on a Devonian shark article in my spare time and its becoming increasingly clear that I have no idea what im doing when it comes to the cladistics script. Ryan shell (talk) 14:42, 9 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The paper concludes "Therefore, although Vectocleidus can be confidently identified as a leptocleidid, its affinities within the clade cannot currently be resolved". So a cladogram would only show a uninformative polytomy...--MWAK (talk) 18:35, 12 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Leptocleidus. 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:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

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) 06:35, 21 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Commons files used on this page or its Wikidata item have been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons files used on this page or its Wikidata item have been nominated for deletion:

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 19:39, 21 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]