Talk:William R. Hammer
| This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page. |
 | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||
| |||||||||||
Family
editcan anyone add anything about Dr. Hammer's family? Is he related to Armand Hammer? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.145.170.85 (talk) 20:21, 10 September 2009 (UTC)
Cryolophosaurus Image
editOn the current edit war(pinging @Zissoudisctrucker:), it seems that there's a conflict over the inclusion of the Cryolophosaurus image. My own stance is that the image shouldn't have been removed, and should have been brought here to the talk page instead. No vandalism occurred and edit wars should be brought to the talk page, as I said in my last edit. So, in the case that the image is kept(since there was no clear reason to completely remove it), I believe that the image I've been using for it is the best one available. It is the taxobox image for Cryolophosaurus, because it is sharper, has higher resolution, and is a lateral view. The images that have been in previous edits either are less sharp and have lower resolution or are in a foreshortened frontal view. I would like to hear others' opinions though. Morosaurus millenii (talk) 23:10, 22 January 2019 (UTC)
Cryolophosaurus Image
editIf you look at the edit history, I have been expanding this stub for the last six months. I felt an image of Cryolophosaurus would be a nice feature to this article. The image originally was a lateral view of the skeletal mount that I had taken and upload. User Morosaurus replaced that image with one of his own that was practically the same image. I felt it was an unneeded edit and reverted it to the original one I posted. User Mososaurus claimed his was the taxobox image and cited the Cryolophosaurus talk page. I changed the image to a new photo of the mount the prominently displays the skull and crest. User Mosoaurus changed the image back to this lateral image. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Zissoudisctrucker (talk • contribs) 21:29, 23 January 2019 (UTC)
- This image is the taxobox image, if you go to the Cryolophosaurus page. And, clearly, it's not the same image, seeing as when your image was put onto the Cryolophosaurus taxobox, it was reverted in preference of the current one(see the Cryolophosaurus talk page for why this is a better image). Yes, a frontal view does display the skull and crest well, but a lateral view shows the overall animal much better. My stance is that the image of the animal should be the one that shows the animal the best, not just the skull. And, looking at the Cryolophosaurus talk page, this was chosen as the taxobox image because the taxobox image is what shows the animal the best. So, I stand by my stance that the image should be the Cryolophosaurus taxobox image. Morosaurus millenii (talk) 22:24, 23 January 2019 (UTC)
- These are all good points, and claims of vandalism are baseless and rude. These images have been brought up in the talk page for Cryolophosaurus, as I'm sure both of you know. Zissoudisctrucker, just face the fact that other Wikipedia editors prefer Morosaurus's image, and don't create an edit war which you are on the wrong side of anyways. Also, sign your comments. Fanboyphilosopher (talk) 22:34, 23 January 2019 (UTC)