Talk:Jurassic/Archive 1

Archive 1

Palms are flowering plants

Flowering plants had not evolved yet, but conifers were common, and in fact were the most diverse group of trees, as were palms Kazlev (2002). Palms are monocots. --Arkuat 10:01, 3 February 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for fixing this, Kazlev. --Arkuat 08:09, 12 March 2006 (UTC)

Early/Lower, Late/Upper

I've been changing these terms to proper usage on this and various pages -- Early and Late are used as time terms, such as "during the Late Jurassic Period", while Upper and Lower refer to the rocks, as in "the Lower Jurassic sandstones of the Jura Mountains". Also, any of these terms are properly capitalized if the division is formal, as is the case with Jurassic; but as an example "early Miocene" would not be capitalized because there is no formal subdivision called "Early Miocene." --Geologyguy 02:44, 30 April 2006 (UTC)

AMK152's Geotimeboxes

AMK152 proposed in edits of 27 December 2006 a geotimebox for this article. I feel that the box information that is appropriate for the article is already contained in the footer, and that other information can be supplied where important, by links from the text. See discussion at Template talk:Geotimebox. --Bejnar 20:30, 29 December 2006 (UTC)

Obscenity used

Some idiots have defaced the content. Any experts in this area, please remove those irrelevant sentences. Thanks! Is there any report mechanism on Wiki for such incidents? 139.168.208.189 12:45, 24 May 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the message about this. Normally such vandalisms are reverted within a few minutes by one of the dozens or hundreds of editors watching this page, but this time took rather longer. You can remove such material yourself - just click the "edit this page" tab at the top. Thanks again Geologyguy 13:23, 24 May 2007 (UTC)

Let's add a map of the world from this period

Yeah The Person Who Is Strange 01:03, 29 August 2007 (UTC)

oxfordian

Oxfordian in the Key events in the Jurassic timeline goes to the disamb page. I cannot seem to correct it. Is the problem in the disamb page itselk, well beyond my skills. Edmund Patrick – confer 20:26, 3 September 2008 (UTC)

What about mammals?

I've read elsewhere that the first true mammals evolved in this period, but there is no mention of it. I would consider this important (but am no expert). --Stm76 (talk) 00:05, 22 February 2010 (UTC)

In popular culture

Everybody knows about Jurassic Park, I'm sure. Does Wikipedia have an article on stories, movies, etc. which deal with prehistoric life? The only examples I'm finding are ones which deal with early human cultures. Has anyone started an article which would include items such as the novel/movie Jurassic Park, as well as time travel stories, and other media? Is it worth adding a section to this article? I can't think of enough examples to start the article myself. Others would probably be able to do it better. Thanks. 99.9.112.31 (talk) 01:41, 24 May 2010 (UTC)NotWillDecker

See Category:Dinosaurs in fiction for existing articles about dinos in fiction and the parent categories at the bottom of that page for more possibilities. Vsmith (talk) 01:56, 24 May 2010 (UTC)

Thanks, I'll look. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.9.112.31 (talk) 19:27, 27 May 2010 (UTC)

Land near poles

"As in the Triassic, there was apparently no land near either pole"

That's not true. Just look at the map. Antartica was near south pole, and there were large islands near the north pole too. Look also at BBC's Walking with Dinosaurs, "Spirits of the Ice Forest".

Granted, there were no ice caps because the general climate was a lot warmer than today, but there were lands near the poles. Their climate was temperate with summers and winters, contrary to the rest of the world which was all tropical. 216.162.79.230 (talk) 18:11, 27 July 2010 (UTC) L.D.

Clarify dating for consistency

I see that the lede now has the Jurassic commencing approx 201.3mya but that 199.6mya is used further down and on all the other articles relating to early / lower Jurasssic, Hettangian, etc. There's no cited ref for 201.3mya in the article (in fact, apart from 5 etymology refs, the whole article is rather light on citations) but if this (201.3mya) is the now accepted value, could someone pls add a ref and amend all of the 199.6's? Thx. 124.169.82.178 (talk) 02:25, 29 August 2013 (UTC)

Tritylodonts

I have removed the comment that these creatures were mammal-like reptiles, given that reptiles (the class reptilia) is a subset of sauropsida, whereas tritylodonts are a subset of synapsida. The lowest-level term that embraces both sauropsids and synapsids is amniotes. [Paleobiology database and some AronRa videos].

I was going to describe tritylodonts as non-mammalian cynodonts, but that's rather like saying the platypus is a non-afrotherian mammal (both are true, but both rather pointless descriptions).Glevum (talk) 23:30, 29 August 2013 (UTC)

Old comments

Is there anyone who can make it so that all pages about a period in geological time have the same start and end dates mentioned on their articles as those mentioned on the article for the Gelologic Time scale?? 66.32.113.158 21:22, 28 Mar 2004 (UTC)

Is this all the link a reader will be offered to Early Jurassic Middle Jurassic or Late Jurassic? Won't there be a brief precis of the spin-off "main" article, so that this trunk article isn't cannibalized? This one should read as complete; the others give more detailed coverage. I can't help because I don't see what the coming structure will be. --Wetman 13:39, 25 Jun 2005 (UTC)

I expect eventually all these pages will have more detailed information. When I have more time (whenever that will be...!) i'll try to fill out some of these timeline pages a bit more M Alan Kazlev 07:24, 26 Jun 2005 (UTC)

---

I think someone added the note about birds evolving without paying attention to the rest of the paragraph, so that the comment about saurischian branch does not apply to the bird sentence, but the sentence before it? Someone knowledgable please investigate.

"During the late Jurassic the first birds evolved from small coelurosaur dinosaurs. All these belong to the "lizard hipped" or saurischian branch of the dinosaurs." --Chinasaur 22:34, 24 October 2005 (UTC)

Strangely, birds are derived from the lizard-hipped branch of dinosaurs, not the bird-hipped branch! Check wiki article on dinosaursGlevum (talk) 00:42, 30 August 2013 (UTC)

Archaeopteryx

As per article on birds, some scientists restrict the term 'bird' to members of the clade 'Aves' [per paleobiology database, this is considered an infra-class, whereas wiki article on Archaeopteryx says Aves is a class]; thus, as Archaeopteryx was moved in 1986 to Avialae, the parent clade of Aves, some scientists no longer consider it to be a bird. I have therefore amended the link-name from bird to avialan, although the link still goes to the same page AvesGlevum (talk) 00:42, 30 August 2013 (UTC)

Proper introduction concerning evolution

Evolution has always been introduced as a theory. When we were in school we studied "The theory of evolution" Evolution has never been proven or factual. Lets have the Wikipedia and the wiki community remain professional and reflect facts when making statements concerning evolution and ensure the sentence starts with "It is believed that...." or "scientists believe..." After all....we are only informing a entire world how scientists view evolution, not stating facts ourselves. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Shakenama (talk • contribs) 12:35, 22 October 2013 (UTC)

See the faq on the evolution talk page, particularly questions 3 and 4.Darthmix (talk) 15:56, 24 October 2013 (UTC)