Talk:Oviraptorosauria

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Oviraptorosauria 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

Dinosaurs Mid‑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
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-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.

Oviraptorisaurs as birds

It is possible that in the future, new specimens of already-known oviraptorosaur genera will be found with feather impressions. This would place the oviraptorosaurs, along with the therizinosaurs, in the Aves. Also, Paraves would be synonymous with Maniraptora.

Only if using the apomorphy-based definition of Aves (that is, if you define Aves to mean "animal with feathers"). Anyway, why would this only happen if previously-known genera are found with feathers? Several species already preserve them, like Caudipteryx and Protarcharopteryx. Also, some paleontologists, including osome of the foremost experts on oviraptorosaurs (Osmolska, etc.), think they're avians based just on skeletal features.

While I personally favor an apomorphy-based definition of Aves, most paleontologists use a node-based definition (Archaeopteryx+modern birds). Therefore, if oviraptorosaurs are birds, it has to be shown that they're more advanced than Archaeopteryx (which, again, Osmolska et al. have attempted to do).Dinoguy2 22:42, 2 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Compromise in anatomy

I like the way this has been handled, J. But maybe we could go just a step further and include this type of material in a separate section (like "Technical description") at the bottom of the article? That way the information will be here, and your average reader will not get turned off and give up reading because they think it's over their heads. Dinoguy2 (talk) 14:02, 19 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Not bad. Ok, let's do it. I'll volunteer to write the non - technical anatomy part for Oviraptorosauria, then see if you think it's readable enough, ok?Jbrougham (talk) 14:42, 19 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Merge Proposal for Caenagnathoidea

Discussion of this merge took place here.

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section. A summary of the conclusions reached follows.

The result of this discussion no support to avoid or dispute the merge. A Cynical Idealist (talk) 05:43, 1 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It was proposed that Caenagnathoidea be merged into Oviraptorosauria because of WP:REDUNDANT and WP:N.

There was support for the merge at WT:DINO, but no discussion on the relevant talk page.
The user proposing the merge elected to close the merge after five days of no additional activity.

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.