Talk:Scipionyx

Dinosaurs Low‑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
Low	This article has been rated as Low-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.

I'm trying to put an image of the Scipionyx fossil, but I can't get it posted. Here is the URL for it at BBC news, http://news.bbc.co.uk/olmedia/1445000/images/_1446706_dino300.jpg . If you know how to put up the image please do! I'll try and gather more info on the dinosaur.

Which affiliation, please?

Article formerly read "Marco Signore of the Universita degli Studi di Napoli in Naples,^[1] who identified it as the first Italian dinosaur." On 18 July 2007, User:Exairetos changed this to "Marco Signore of the University of Naples Federico II". Can anyone clarify this matter? Thanks. -- Writtenonsand 17:26, 19 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It's the same school, just written in English. Marco worked there as recently as 2005 and probably still does. Sheep81 18:23, 19 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Coelurosaurs, feathers

"Fossil evidence indicates that most coelurosaurs were probably feathered."

I've removed this. Not exactly false, but un-cited, vague, and veers dangerously close to WP:SYNTHESIS.

Also, although Skippy was "preserved in the Pietraroia limestone formation, well known for unusually well-preserved fossils. ... bodies of water [which] were oxygen deficient, leading to the well-preserved Scipionyx specimen, much like the fine fossil preservation seen in Germany's Archaeopteryx", this Scipionyx chick shows no actual evidence of feathers or down.

I wouldn't have any objection to including something on this if we could produce a good (Scipionyx-relevant) cite.

-- Writtenonsand (talk) 05:01, 6 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

There's no evidence of scales or skin either though, in spite of the preservation. FunkMonk (talk) 15:07, 6 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Dal Sasso & Maganuco concluded in their 2011 monograph that Scipionyx was probably (proto)feathered.--MWAK (talk) 09:18, 14 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified (January 2018)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Scipionyx. 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:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

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: 5 June 2024).

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) 23:50, 24 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Scipionyx the Carcharodontosaurid?

A recently published article has proposed that some Compsognathids are actually hatchlings of various large predatory dinosaurs, and Scipionyx in particular is possibly a hatchling Carcharodontosaurid. <ref>https://www.researchgate.net/publication/354418322_Comments_on_the_Mesozoic_theropod_dinosaurs_from_Italy<ref>

This is also mentioned in the article, but could also be mentioned in the intro. I disagree it belongs in the discovery section, though. FunkMonk (talk) 00:06, 8 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The "History of Discovery" section seems to cover more information than just the discovery and naming of the taxon, and in any case, I don't see why the article shouldn't include subsequent notable events in the history of scientific understanding of the taxon. The discovery that Scipionyx represents a hatchling carcharodontosaur seems like a notable event in the scientific history of the taxon to me. Ornithopsis (talk) 01:45, 8 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

It will probably shape up better if the article is ever expanded fully. More importantly, I guess this study should be covered at Compsognathidae itself? FunkMonk (talk) 16:24, 27 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

On another note, isn't it highly unlikely that a young individual, like the one this drawing[1] is based on would have a colourful dewlap? FunkMonk (talk) 16:26, 27 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

^ Cite error: The named reference Poling was invoked but never defined (see the help page).

[Poling-1] Cite error: The named reference Poling was invoked but never defined (see the help page).

[1]