Wikipedia:Release Version Nominations/Set Nominations/Dinosaurs
Dinosaurs
[edit]
Dinosaur- List of dinosaurs
- Psittacosaurus
- Albertosaurus
- Velociraptor
- Tyrannosaurus
- Stegosaurus
- Diplodocus
- Triceratops
Scelidosaurus- Iguanodon
- Compsognathus
- Archaeopteryx
- Heterodontosauridae
- Thescelosaurus
- Amphicoelias
- Ankylosaurus
All of these dinosaur articles are Featured or Good. They represent some of the best work of Wikipedia:WikiProject Dinosaurs. The old CD has just five articles, and that isn't enough to fairly represent even the most well known dinosaur genera. This list, while still short, is much more representative, with more diverse groups (instead of having just a single article on one herbivorous dinosaur!). Firsfron of Ronchester 22:21, 26 April 2007 (UTC)
- I don't know how succinct the CD's suposed to be, but the nom can probably afford to lose the less widely known Albertosaurus, Scelidosaurus, Heterodontosauridae, Amphicoelias and Thescelosaurus.Circeus 22:42, 26 April 2007 (UTC)
- While I agree there is a difference between dinosaur "superstars" like Diplodocus versus lesser-known genera such as Amphicoelias, the nominations below this one include uncited stubs like Music of Oregon, Hand saw, Wood as a medium(!), etc. Of the above, only Amphicoelias doesn't give its name to a family (or in the case of Albertosaurus, sub-family) of dinosaurs. Firsfron of Ronchester 00:31, 27 April 2007 (UTC)
- Albertosaurus is in Version 0.5, so it will go into 0.7 automatically. As for the others, I thing this list is concise and representative (I'll have to take your word for that, thought it seems to be based on my limited knowledge). All the articles are also highly rated. I wouldn't object to the entire list going through, as I think we can probably make the next release much bigger, but I'd like to hear what other knowledgable people have to say. Thanks for a great selection, Walkerma 03:29, 1 May 2007 (UTC)
- Neat! There are other articles that would help make the group here more representative (there are no prosauropods on this list, for example), but these are currently the only ones recognized as GA or FA. Firsfron of Ronchester 04:28, 1 May 2007 (UTC)
- Recently, six other articles have become GA or FA:
- Albertosaurus is in Version 0.5, so it will go into 0.7 automatically. As for the others, I thing this list is concise and representative (I'll have to take your word for that, thought it seems to be based on my limited knowledge). All the articles are also highly rated. I wouldn't object to the entire list going through, as I think we can probably make the next release much bigger, but I'd like to hear what other knowledgable people have to say. Thanks for a great selection, Walkerma 03:29, 1 May 2007 (UTC)
- While I agree there is a difference between dinosaur "superstars" like Diplodocus versus lesser-known genera such as Amphicoelias, the nominations below this one include uncited stubs like Music of Oregon, Hand saw, Wood as a medium(!), etc. Of the above, only Amphicoelias doesn't give its name to a family (or in the case of Albertosaurus, sub-family) of dinosaurs. Firsfron of Ronchester 00:31, 27 April 2007 (UTC)
- Is it possible to include these articles as well? None of them give their names to families of dinosaurs, but they help fill in the empty gaps. There are still over a thousand other genera still not represented in this nomination, so I don't think it's excessive: imagine if, say, only a few mammals were represented on the release version, despite there being a thousand genera of mammals. Firsfron of Ronchester 11:31, 9 June 2007 (UTC)
- I have added the original sent into the DVD selection. We need to get more input on the new set; I've heard of the first four, at least! Since quality is not an issue here, we just need to know that they are significant dinosaurs; I'll request more opinions. Walkerma 02:51, 17 June 2007 (UTC)