Talk:Carcharodontosauridae

Dinosaurs Mid‑importance

	Dinosaurs portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Dinosaurs, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of dinosaurs and dinosaur-related topics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.DinosaursWikipedia:WikiProject DinosaursTemplate:WikiProject Dinosaursdinosaurs articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Palaeontology Low‑importance

	Paleontology portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Palaeontology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of palaeontology-related topics and create a standardized, informative, comprehensive and easy-to-use resource on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PalaeontologyWikipedia:WikiProject PalaeontologyTemplate:WikiProject PalaeontologyPalaeontology articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Apparently it's an actual thing: German Wikipedia article. Maybe we can fix it? Subterrane 08:33, 27 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

What makes a Carcharodontosaurid?[edit]

This article doesn't include anything about this, which is very important. 122.109.250.74 (talk) 06:53, 1 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

:Various cranial and dental characters usually having to do with rugosity. I'll take care of it. 180.191.138.175 (talk) 03:04, 6 December 2016 (UTC)Luigi Gaskell[reply]

Problem.....[edit]

For some reason the temporal range of Carcharodontosauridae extinction was changed from 70mya to 91mya. Despite the fact there were appropriate sources stating Campanian-Maastrichtian records of this family. I think someone has a problem with updated information. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 161.50.48.2 (talk) 01:29, 20 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

umm[edit]

"However, past the Turonian (lol), there seem to be no signs of the presence of these animals anywhere on the world." Notice the 'lol', but sccoriding to the history it has been removed. But it hasnt. So i decided to, one problem. When i edit the page the'lol' aint there. ??????? Spinodontosaurus (talk) 16:40, 7 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I see the problem too. It's probably a lag in page cache somewhere along the line. So, I edited that section to clear out the cobwebs (merged the two paragraphs; no problem with reversing this, as it was a test mostly), and it looks like it's gone now. J. Spencer (talk) 16:49, 7 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Maastrichtian Carcharodontosaurids[edit]

I have prove that they defiantly survived till 67mya

http://carnivoraforum.com/topic/9703198/5/#new
http://ojs.c3sl.ufpr.br/ojs2/index.php/rbg/login
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0195667112001176
http://dml.cmnh.org/2012Jul/msg00120.html — Preceding unsigned comment added by 60.242.105.47 (talk) 08:05, 20 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Campanian–Maastrichtian is by definition 70 Ma ago, not 67. This can be added with a valid citation of the paper. MMartyniuk (talk) 11:54, 22 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Carcharodontosauridae. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140222053906/http://rbg.sbgeo.org.br/index.php/rbg/article/view/1622 to http://rbg.sbgeo.org.br/index.php/rbg/article/view/1622

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 01:15, 15 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Etymology in the article lede[edit]

@Nick Levine: I noticed earlier that you undid an edit by an IP user on the etymology in the article lede. The etymology in the first place seems a bit unnecessary, however, as the name Carcharodontosauridae derives from Carcharodontosaurus, the archetypal genus, and a complete etymology is shown on that page. Hence, I think it would be possible to just axe the etymology portion in the title. Hdjensofjfnen (tap) 18:36, 18 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Seems reasonable. Nick Levine (talk) 18:45, 18 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

size statement in the lede[edit]

Giganotosaurus, Mapusaurus, Carcharodontosaurus, and Tyrannotitan all rivaled or exceeded Tyrannosaurus in size. <-- Isn't the weight for the largest T-Rex specimens estimated at 8-9 tons? And Tyrannotitan is not as large as the others from what I've read.HammerFilmFan (talk) 03:27, 6 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

updates for N.America[edit]

Pete Makovicky papers:

Meraxes gigas - https://www.eurekalert.org/news-releases/958071

Siats meekerorum - https://news.ncsu.edu/2013/11/dinosaur-discovery/ HammerFilmFan (talk) 13:54, 19 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]