Talk:Monoclonius

Dinosaurs Low‑importance

	Dinosaurs portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Dinosaurs, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of dinosaurs and dinosaur-related topics 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.DinosaursWikipedia:WikiProject DinosaursTemplate:WikiProject Dinosaursdinosaurs 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.

Meaning of Name

I changed the derivation of the name from "one horn" to "single stem", which is the way it's usually translated. ("Horn" would be "keros".) The name actually does not refer to the nasal horn which Monoclonius is restored as having, but to the teeth which have single roots. It is helpful to realize that Cope in the same paper that he names Monoclonius also names Diclonius, and it is in contrast to the double rooted teeth of Diclonius that he names Monoclonius. There weren't enough remains to know about facial horns and this was in 1876, several years before ANY Ceratopsians were known to have them. It still isn't known what arrangement Monoclonius had; not enough material is known- although it appears to be a Centrosaur and they tended to have long nasal horns with short or even non-existant brow horns. Restorations of Monoclonius in dinosaur books are based on Centrosaurus material; for many years the two were thought to be synonymous with Centrosaurus being the junior synonym. CFLeon 23:59, 8 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Rewrite

I'm currently rewriting the article as part of my Ceratopsia work, and this is one of the longer, more involved entries. it's taking me longer than I had intended, so sorry if it appears to be incomplete. CFLeon 22:27, 17 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Size?

Does anyone know the size of Monoclonius? It is completely nonexistant in the article, and I'm not sure what internet sources can be considered reliable. MelicansMatkin 21:31, 12 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure, but I imagine it as being similar in size to Centrosaurus, which was about 15-20 feet. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.36.148.242 (talk) 06:48, 25 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]