Talk:Lesothosaurus

Another species?

I have a personal record of another species, L. australis. Can anyone else verify this? Ninjatacoshell 22:10, 12 April 2007 (UTC)

That's actually Fabrosaurus australis, but such a species could not exist under the ICZN, because, it's the type species of Fabrosaurus, and Fabrosaurus predates Lesothosaurus, so to synonymize them would put everything under Fabrosaurus. J. Spencer 22:14, 12 April 2007 (UTC)

Actualy to my reseach on dino books,there is a same species to this dino(with same bones).Pls search it carefully. 18:25, 9 Feb 2013 (HK)10:26, 9 February 2013 (UTC)218.103.247.199 (Treehouse basher clubleader-Javy)

Phylogenetic placement?

Butler et al. (2008) recovered Lesothosaurus as a basal thyreophoran. This isn't reflected in the article though. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 207.245.160.85 (talk) 17:53, 5 August 2008 (UTC)

And now it is. J. Spencer (talk) 01:25, 7 August 2008 (UTC)

New restoration proposal

I'm not suggesting to remove the current one; but is it worth trying to get the permission to use this: http://sputatrix.deviantart.com/#/art/Lesothosaurus-diagnosticus-44725391?hf=1 ? I've been discussing using a Zalmoxes from the same the same guy with FunkMonk on the Zalmoxes talk page.142.176.114.76 (talk) 01:32, 8 March 2014 (UTC)

There are two possible problems with than one, though. Thee eye is largely too big, they would never fill up the entire orbit, only the inner circle of the sclerotic ring, and it looks like it's tipping over. The one we have already is more accurate in these regards. FunkMonk (talk) 16:47, 18 March 2014 (UTC)

Possible pronation?

I have a dinosaur-book that shows a Lesothosaurus skeleton with pronating-hands, which is odd 'cause the book's creator was careful to draw theropods, sauropodomorphs and heterodontosaurs with correct-hand-positions, but I'm stumped about this one being an exception (along with Hypsilophodon and its kin and pachycephalosaurs also being drawn with pronating-hands), so I'm confused.184.186.4.209 (talk) 22:04, 6 August 2019 (UTC)

Ironically, heterodontosaurs are the most likely of any ornithischian to have been able to pronate their hands. This might have been an assumption based off the wrist rotation of heterodontosaurs, but I'm unsure about that if they were shown with non-pronation. IJReid ^{{{T - C - D - R}}} 21:30, 10 August 2019 (UTC)

Like I mentioned elsewhere, the Holtz book is already old (2007), and some of the images in it are even older... FunkMonk (talk) 22:56, 10 August 2019 (UTC)

Merge proposal

Fabrosaurus seems to be a synonym; merge in? Klbrain (talk) 22:30, 18 February 2021 (UTC)

It's dubious; it's more than likely the same animal but the material is too poor to know for sure. They're not treated as definite synonyms by the literature, hence why the younger name Lesothosaurus is used. No merge. LittleLazyLass (Talk | Contributions) 02:04, 19 February 2021 (UTC)

OK, happy to withdraw the proposal given the expert view. Klbrain (talk) 17:56, 3 September 2021 (UTC)

Orphaned references in Lesothosaurus

I check pages listed in Category:Pages with incorrect ref formatting to try to fix reference errors. One of the things I do is look for content for orphaned references in wikilinked articles. I have found content for some of Lesothosaurus's orphans, the problem is that I found more than one version. I can't determine which (if any) is correct for this article, so I am asking for a sentient editor to look it over and copy the correct ref content into this article.

Reference named "butler2012":

• From Heterodontosaurus: Butler, Richard J; Porro, Laura B; Galton, Peter M; Chiappe, Luis M (2012). "Anatomy and Cranial Functional Morphology of the Small-Bodied Dinosaur Fruitadens haagarorum from the Upper Jurassic of the USA". PLOS ONE. 7 (4): e31556. Bibcode:2012PLoSO...731556B. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0031556. PMC 3324477. PMID 22509242.
• From Echinodon: Butler, P.M.; Sigogneau-Russell, D.; Ensom, P.C. (2012). "Possible persistence of the morganucodontans in the Lower Cretaceous Purbeck Limestone Group (Dorset, England)". Cretaceous Research. 33 (1): 135–145. doi:10.1016/j.cretres.2011.09.007.

I apologize if any of the above are effectively identical; I am just a simple computer program, so I can't determine whether minor differences are significant or not. AnomieBOT⚡ 15:09, 11 November 2022 (UTC)