Talk:Rutellum
Appearance
This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Rutellum redirect. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
This redirect does not require a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||
|
How was the fossil described?
[edit]Obviously not as a dinosaur.--Gazzster (talk) 16:36, 10 April 2008 (UTC)
- How can a pre-Linnean name be a nomen nudum? FunkMonk (talk) 10:51, 16 May 2017 (UTC)
Implicatum or impicatum?
[edit]On the internet I read that maybe it was actually impicatum (without an l) and not implicatum, and this means a completely different thing in Latin. Can someone confirm it from a reliable source? 2A02:AB8C:4021:4780:6972:FAFD:8ACF:9246 (talk) 20:02, 15 April 2017 (UTC)
- Yup, that's the spelling in Lhuyd. Good catch. Ashorocetus (talk | contribs) 04:30, 13 October 2017 (UTC)
Did Delair & Sargeant (2002) actually ressurect the genus Rutellum?
[edit]ref = Delair, J.B., and Sarjeant, W.A.S. (2002). The earliest discoveries of dinosaurs: the records re-examined. Proceedings of the Geologists' Association 113:185–197. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.32.34.85 (talk) 16:37, 19 May 2021 (UTC)