Talk:Dilong paradoxus

New picture?

http://www.calacademy.org/exhibits/dinos/images/Dilong_paradoxus.png

Should we use this picture of the sculpture since it does a better job of showing of Dilong's head? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Nitron Ninja Apple (talk • contribs) 13:06, 17 February 2007 (UTC).

Yeah I need a picture of Dilong for my user sub-page. --Sneaky Oviraptor18^{talk edits tribute} 17:10, 3 February 2009 (UTC)

• On a related note, I re-added an image of a reconstructed skeleton, which was removed because it was thought to depict Raptorex, but see here: http://www.dinocasts.com/prod_productDetails.asp?ProductId=732 Note it also has much longer arms than the Raptorex mounts. http://www.angelfire.com/mi/dinosaurs/dinosaurs_raptorex.html FunkMonk (talk) 16:27, 11 August 2016 (UTC)

Taxobox Image

Our current taxobox image doesn't really work. It's a photo of a largely complete specimen of Dilong, but this specimen is crushed and you can't really notice any details. If you don't know where to look, you can't even see where the head is. I suggest we switch to a photo of a skeletal mount, just as what is being done in the Caudipteryx article. Now, the current skeleton mount photo we have in the article is bad, but I have uploaded a new photo to Commons, of the same mount, but with better clarity and angle. I want some more opinions on this matter. BleachedRice (talk) 16:26, 3 March 2018 (UTC)

• 
  New image I'm proposing.

Sounds good to me. Note that the old photo of the reconstruction was formerly in the taxobox, but was removed because it was thought to be Raptorex (see above section). FunkMonk (talk) 22:06, 3 March 2018 (UTC)

Now we just need to show the actual specimen instead of the old blurry photo of the reconstruction. FunkMonk (talk) 01:15, 4 March 2018 (UTC)

Requested move 23 March 2023

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

• Dilong paradoxus → Dilong
• Dilong → ?

– Extinct animal articles are named for genera, not species. An anonymous username, not my real name 16:23, 23 March 2023 (UTC)

Note: pages with content, such as Dilong are ineligible to be new titles in move requests unless they are also dispositioned. Dilong → ? has been added to this request to satisfy that requirement. P.I. Ellsworth , ed. ^{put'er there} 18:28, 23 March 2023 (UTC)

Problem is it's taken by a dragon, Dilong. FunkMonk (talk) 16:32, 23 March 2023 (UTC)

WP:MONOTYPICFAUNA says The exception is when a monotypic genus name needs to be disambiguated. The article should then be at the species, since this is a more natural form of disambiguation. Given that the name of the genus by itself is ambiguous, the current name of the page is as expected, and I don't see the need to move it. William Avery (talk) 07:44, 24 March 2023 (UTC)

Damn it, you're right, I agree completely. I don't know how I failed to miss that it was already an article. An anonymous username, not my real name 10:33, 24 March 2023 (UTC)

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.