723:
142:
315:
21:
196:
1550:
1517:
1407:
1385:
1331:
1313:
1253:
1215:
305:
284:
175:
1497:
1457:
1432:
1359:
1285:
133:
206:
1391:
of ceratopsian is present beyond the barrest of details in the classification section. Lastly, the history section covers up to 1876 before dropping off a cliff with the exception of an unsourced, short, hard to understand note about ceratopsids (the only group even covered, since we didn't go into the 20th century to talk about the others).
1191:. I looked at the GA review, and to my horror it was passed without a single suggestion, the reviewer merely praising it giving it an instant pass. To rectify this decision which does not at all hold up today, I've decided I need to file it for delisting, and hopefully somebody will improve and get it back here some day, deservedly.
693:. The authors of Gobi found it to clade with Baga basally to Proto. Obviously, this was not recovered in the other, earlier cladograms on the page. Gobi is a pretty new find so it's a wait and see game to see if the Gobi+Baga clade is recovered in future studies. What we should do with this, I don't know.
1390:
The palaeobiology section in particular is woefully inadequate, not covering certain topics at all (such as integument, despite having an image on the subject), and covering some others with literal two-sentence sections. The anatomy section makes no mention at all of postcrania. Nothing on the topic
865:
Bones have been found in the stomach of
Pachyrhinosaurus, Pachyrhinosaurus was also found to have quills, it hasn't been officially published yet, but that will be a matter of time, and since those two were omnivores and had quills, saying the rest didn't would be arguring for a unique specialization
813:
Along with Quills, this theory should be included since both are realistic and have no evidence against them. The
Paleontological world needs to move on from old stereotypes. You just can't ignore the fact that triceratops had an omnivore's jaws. There's no evidence against it. Also, bones have been
914:
because they haven't been officially announced and published. Knowledge (XXG), and all encyclopedias, must by their nature always be one step behind the bleeding edge of the science because the standards are too high to allow internet rumors as valid sources. If you don't like it this isn't the web
634:
Personally, I miss some information about the physiology of these dinosaurs. What traits did they have that made them so successful? Duck billed dinsaurs had special jaws which made it possible for them to chew their food. Did ceratopsians had the same kind of jaws too, or even improved versions of
468:
Considerations of precedence are relevant when a binomial name is attributed to a single concrete object, like a holotype. When higher taxa than the genus implicit in the binomial name, are named, precedence becomes irrelevant. There are no official rules governing the names of taxa above the level
1668:
Ceratopsians are
Actually Related To Rhinos. Every Entire Species Of Ceratopsians Are Definitely Related To Rhinos And Also Have Have The Same Sound Of a Elephant. (Except The Earliest Known Species That Is The Only Reptile-Like Hebvione That Looks Almost Or Clearly Nothing Like Rhinos Is “Yinlong
1220:
In a few spots, such as in the first two sentences of the history section, I had to read multiple times to understand (I was unsure whether Hayden conducted the 1855 expedition). Later in that same section, Cope's dichotomy of
Ceratopsidae and Agathaumidae is completely beyond my understanding. In
461:
No brainer really - historically there have been all sorts of guffs in naming plants and animals, misspellings, what is published takes precedence. This is highlighted by the use of greek/latin/aboriginal/amerind/anagrams etc now. Especially with the latter there is no 'correct' syntax so what the
1318:
For the most part it's good, but the sources for omnivory are questionable. Ref 38 was not only a post on Flickr, but it also no longer even exists, so it has to be removed anyway. This just leaves the two-decade old
Dinosaur Mailing List post by Naish. Now that's certainly a valid source, but in
671:
Bagaceratops appears twice on the cladogram--once under
Bagaceratopsidae and then again under Protoceratopsidae. Bagaceratopsidae seems like a no-brainer to me, if this article does accept its validity, except that the Bagaceratops page lists it under Protoceratopsidae... somebody who is a little
1186:
is another dinosaur article that probably doesn't meet the standard nowadays, but I don't think it's a pressing issue to de-list it. But it's on a much less important topic, and is pretty close to GA, whereas this article is nowhere near it, and on one of the major groups of
1412:
As mentioned above a lack of detail is the main issue, but talking about three different phylogenetic matrices for no apparent reason, given two are over a decade old, is in my eyes going into excessive detail about the relationships of a few basal members of the
1642:
847:
at Mark Witton's site. Provided that the report he's thinking of is accurate (not misinterpreted/misidentified, overblown, or a taphonomic artifact), this is not many ceratopsians, nor is it honestly necessarily compelling for the rest of the group.
1627:
1336:
The article is full of a variety of unsourced statements or whole paragraphs, most extensively throughout the
Classfication section. At least one sourced statement is, additionally, unsupported by the given citation, so far as I can tell (that
1717:
146:
1707:
1722:
336:-related topics and create a standardized, informative, comprehensive and easy-to-use resource on Knowledge (XXG). If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join
469:
of family — and everyone has always called any higher level taxon as it pleased him. If I am at liberty to call the group "Cornufacies" or "XYZ", why am I not free to call them by a correct name?--
1534:
images are both inaccurate, the history section would be better served by an image of a specimen from the time, and the taxobox image does a poor job of showing the appearance of the animal shown.
1670:
1258:
Didn't check every word against MOS:WTW, but no wordings stood out as poor to me. However, it has a discouraged layout in its use of multiple extremely short sections under their own subheaders.
1752:
764:
surely the recent evidence of this topic should be mentioned, psittacosaurus has had bones found in its stomach area, the jaws are like that of an omnivore then a herbivore etc
725:, but I can't find any hint of its name. Our article here does not seem to list it, judging by the absence of any Utah Ceratopsians. Should we add it, even without a name?
1243:
1107:
1103:
1089:
371:
1747:
1563:
I could go on to pick on various individual statements, but I don't think it's necessary in light of how poorly it already fares just looking at the GA criteria.
361:
397:
is used, but there should be only ONE article discussing them, not two. So be a little bit responsible and focus on one article. This article should be locked.
1487:
1055:
266:
1702:
1757:
1732:
963:
correct from the Koine onwards, meaning "horned visage", from "opsis". So the debate is, from my point of view, pointless. After all, newer forms of Greek
256:
1307:
1247:
1239:
337:
32:
1231:
1742:
1737:
1712:
441:
This is sort of an important issue that hasn't seen any play since last year... i'm gonig to take it over for discussion at
Wikiproject dinosaurs.
1221:
the classification section, the definition of
Coronosauria causes confusion, as it's at odds with its placement in two of the phylogenetic trees.
232:
328:
289:
47:
1302:, including those for direct quotations, statistics, published opinion, counter-intuitive or controversial statements that are challenged or
1017:
651:
1193:
42:
983:
821:
797:
Nope, shouldn't be mentioned yet as, as far as I know, none of it has been officially described or published on. Maybe in a year or two...
1303:
1364:
Everything is to my knowledge fine in this regard. One could check the anatomy section against all its sources, but this seems excessive.
1180:
I was a bit surprised when I realized this article was GA-class. The reassessment process is one I generally don't feel the need to use;
1727:
1235:
716:
1674:
673:
219:
180:
38:
1462:
The problems the article has stem from being written and reviewed too long ago, so this is unsurprisingly not an issue in this case.
873:
781:
1325:
1555:
Given it fails over half of the sub-criteria (and is far from meeting three of the criteria), the conclusion of a fail is obvious.
1654:
635:
them? Since they were some of the last to evolve, they should have some advanced traits lacking in other members of ornitischia.
1697:
1692:
1612:
1581:
155:
1056:
https://web.archive.org/web/20070509140736/http://www.palaeos.com:80/Vertebrates/Units/320Ornithischia/800.html#Ceratopsinae
1491:
1150:
1641:
and
Ceratopsia. This grouping is supported in most cladistic analysises since, but has only been used as a name twice,
1507:
1295:
1227:
1650:
910:
Look, I agree that ceratopsians were probably at least partially omnivorous. The psittacosaur gut contents don't lie.
551:
and had very small frills. This group later gave rise to a subgroup, the Coronosauria ("crowned lizards"), which were
1479:
925:
Not to violate Assume Good Faith, but I'd also look at this editor's recent act of wholesale racist vandalism to the
1646:
1483:
1401:
1267:
20:
1021:
1397:
1379:
1168:
1106:
to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
647:
231:
topics on Knowledge (XXG). If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join
987:
843:. Also, which ceratopsians have bones in their gut contents? All I can find is the reference to one possible
825:
607:; "Ceratopsia" has chronological precedence and is more widely used, probably because of the association with
531:
and neck frills. The horns may have been used for display, defense, and combat with other members of the same
161:
718:
The description given, mentioning two nose horns, makes me think it may be the animal displayed here, at the
1141:
1047:
918:
I'd also like to know where you're getting this info about bones in ceratopsian stomach contents other than
744:
It's bound to be one of at least a couple of new genera in press, so it's best to let it be for the moment.
677:
1353:
1349:
869:
817:
785:
777:
639:
37:, but it has been removed from the list. There are suggestions below for improving the article to meet the
643:
1591:
1522:
Most of the images are fine (though the skin impression image is a bit lost without a section), but the
1125:
If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with
1113:
877:
588:
1511:
1451:
1046:. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit
931:
article as a testament to his level of scientific thinking and willingness to improve Knowledge (XXG).
1080:
901:
853:
749:
719:
714:
1059:
132:
1608:
1577:
1172:
972:
320:
103:
1471:
936:
802:
732:
713:
Is anyone aware of further sources on the Utah Ceratopsian discovered in 2002/announced in 2006?
698:
228:
1197:
1110:
before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template
1306:, and contentious material relating to living persons—science-based articles should follow the
1278:
A. It contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with
1126:
1422:
1279:
892:
536:
211:
1133:
393:
To all the anons who keep contributing to this article: I don't care whether Ceratopsia or
1524:
897:
849:
745:
535:. The frills were probably too fragile for defense, and may have been used for display or
1299:
840:
1013:
It would probably be better if someone more knowledgeable than myself did this. Thanks.
1595:
1564:
1530:
1429:
It represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each:
1319:
absence of even a mention in the actual literature I don't think it warrants inclusion.
1092:, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by
968:
967:
often been used for scientific terms (sometimes with comic effect, e.g. "oligopsony").
600:
585:
543:
528:
474:
1132:
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with
1099:
1686:
932:
798:
768:
727:
694:
561:
524:
452:
442:
1188:
689:
571:
566:
398:
333:
1175:. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the reassessment.
982:
Since it's derived from Ceratops and not from "Ceratopsis" it's still incorrect.
927:
603:
ending. While "Ceratopia" is linguistically correct, and thus preferred by many
577:
552:
504:
431:
304:
283:
195:
174:
1182:
1098:. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
1039:
976:
604:
516:
508:
310:
201:
1212:
A. The prose is clear and concise, and the spelling and grammar are correct:
470:
415:
394:
1594:, so I'll complete the demotion given how far it is from meeting criteria.
1339:
1007:
999:
672:
more knowledgeable in Ceratopsian taxonomy needs to take a look at this.
512:
224:
1450:
It does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing
1343:
could potentially be a leptoceratopsid, protoceratopsid, or ceratopsid.
548:
532:
1718:
Knowledge (XXG) level-5 vital articles in Biology and health sciences
615:
regulates higher level zoological taxa, there is no official answer.
556:
1590:
There's been some support and no objections to the demotion over at
1678:
1658:
1616:
1585:
1155:
1025:
991:
940:
905:
881:
857:
829:
806:
789:
753:
738:
702:
681:
478:
455:
445:
434:
418:
1060:
http://www.palaeos.com/Vertebrates/Units/320Ornithischia/800.html
1649:. Should we still use the term. I personally believe we should.
612:
596:
520:
687:
For the record, the reason for the discrepancy looks like it's
126:
1708:
Knowledge (XXG) vital articles in Biology and health sciences
618:
In either case, the name means "horned face", from the Greek
1065:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the
41:. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be
1050:
for additional information. I made the following changes:
839:
It's unpublished informed speculation at this point. See
912:
They also don't exist for the purposes of an encyclopedia
1043:
96:
77:
559:. The coronosaurians include earlier ceratopsids like
1723:
C-Class vital articles in Biology and health sciences
890:
Point me to the papers with this new information on
332:, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
223:, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
51:
of the decision if they believe there was a mistake.
1102:using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
1753:C-Class Palaeontology articles of Mid-importance
527:where they grew in size and developed elaborate
491:The full text of Ceratopia, as of my redirect:
1088:This message was posted before February 2018.
814:found in the stomachs of many ceratopsians.
8:
1400:without going into unnecessary detail (see
1038:I have just modified one external link on
955:Actually, while "Ceratopsia" is incorrect
278:
169:
56:
15:
1626:Ceratopsomorpha was named in 1998 in the
1006:We should include a mention of the clade
998:We should include a mention of the clade
346:Knowledge (XXG):WikiProject Palaeontology
611:. Since no official authority like the
280:
171:
130:
1703:Knowledge (XXG) level-5 vital articles
1671:2601:406:5000:BE80:CC9E:18B6:9BCB:18A7
1748:Mid-importance Palaeontology articles
1077:to let others know (documentation at
654:) 18:45, 29 June 2006 193.217.196.189
241:Knowledge (XXG):WikiProject Dinosaurs
7:
326:This article is within the scope of
217:This article is within the scope of
1469:Is it illustrated, if possible, by
591:originally named the group "Ceratop
160:It is of interest to the following
1758:WikiProject Palaeontology articles
1733:High-importance dinosaurs articles
349:Template:WikiProject Palaeontology
14:
1633:, to describe a clade made up of
1622:Use of Ceratopsomorpha in Article
1042:. Please take a moment to review
660:GA review by [[User:Mmoyer|Mmoyer
1548:
1515:
1495:
1455:
1430:
1405:
1383:
1357:
1329:
1311:
1283:
1251:
1213:
313:
303:
282:
204:
194:
173:
140:
131:
19:
709:Ceratopsian with two nose horns
366:This article has been rated as
261:This article has been rated as
1743:C-Class Palaeontology articles
1738:WikiProject Dinosaurs articles
1713:C-Class level-5 vital articles
1308:scientific citation guidelines
555:, much larger, and frequently
244:Template:WikiProject Dinosaurs
33:Natural sciences good articles
1:
1156:15:32, 18 November 2016 (UTC)
866:that you have no proof for!
340:and see a list of open tasks.
235:and see a list of open tasks.
1679:06:16, 8 February 2023 (UTC)
1659:17:11, 10 January 2022 (UTC)
1549:
1516:
1496:
1456:
1431:
1406:
1384:
1358:
1330:
1312:
1284:
1252:
1214:
992:09:54, 3 November 2021 (UTC)
977:08:33, 28 October 2009 (UTC)
1026:12:49, 23 August 2012 (UTC)
941:17:28, 12 August 2009 (UTC)
906:15:43, 12 August 2009 (UTC)
882:15:31, 12 August 2009 (UTC)
858:14:47, 12 August 2009 (UTC)
830:08:54, 12 August 2009 (UTC)
807:21:49, 11 August 2009 (UTC)
790:19:45, 11 August 2009 (UTC)
419:13:51, 19 August 2005 (UTC)
1774:
1728:C-Class dinosaurs articles
1280:the layout style guideline
1119:(last update: 5 June 2024)
1035:Hello fellow Wikipedians,
703:16:44, 10 March 2009 (UTC)
682:12:51, 10 March 2009 (UTC)
446:00:09, 28 April 2006 (UTC)
435:22:20, 27 April 2006 (UTC)
372:project's importance scale
267:project's importance scale
45:. Editors may also seek a
1617:16:22, 16 July 2018 (UTC)
1586:04:02, 30 June 2018 (UTC)
1488:valid fair use rationales
950:
754:17:23, 18 July 2009 (UTC)
739:03:32, 18 July 2009 (UTC)
599:, which has an incorrect
401:23:58, 29 Apr 2005 (UTC)
365:
329:WikiProject Palaeontology
298:
260:
189:
168:
117:
104:Good article reassessment
59:
55:
1664:(All) Realated To Rhinos
1226:B. It complies with the
515:that evolved during the
479:18:02, 8 June 2008 (UTC)
456:11:48, 1 June 2006 (UTC)
1510:to the topic, and have
1304:likely to be challenged
1161:Individual Reassessment
1031:External links modified
760:omnivorous ceratopsians
1698:C-Class vital articles
1693:Delisted good articles
1651:Logosvenator wikiensis
541:Early members such as
352:Palaeontology articles
1373:broad in its coverage
951:Greek of 'Ceratopsia'
589:Othniel Charles Marsh
523:, and then spread to
220:WikiProject Dinosaurs
154:on Knowledge (XXG)'s
147:level-5 vital article
120:Delisted good article
39:good article criteria
1647:another time in 2013
1454:or content dispute:
1398:focused on the topic
1378:A. It addresses the
1350:copyright violations
1326:no original research
1273:no original research
1100:regular verification
841:No original research
720:Royal Tyrrell Museum
85:Good article nominee
1173:Talk:Ceratopsia/GA1
1167:This discussion is
1090:After February 2018
1069:parameter below to
321:Paleontology portal
1348:D. It contains no
1248:list incorporation
1144:InternetArchiveBot
1095:InternetArchiveBot
1010:in this article.
462:author says goes.
247:dinosaurs articles
156:content assessment
60:Article milestones
1512:suitable captions
1490:are provided for
1296:in-line citations
1120:
872:comment added by
820:comment added by
780:comment added by
656:
642:comment added by
386:
385:
382:
381:
378:
377:
277:
276:
273:
272:
125:
124:
113:
112:
1765:
1603:
1600:
1572:
1569:
1552:
1551:
1519:
1518:
1499:
1498:
1492:non-free content
1484:copyright status
1459:
1458:
1434:
1433:
1409:
1408:
1387:
1386:
1361:
1360:
1333:
1332:
1315:
1314:
1300:reliable sources
1287:
1286:
1255:
1254:
1217:
1216:
1154:
1145:
1118:
1117:
1096:
1084:
1002:in this article.
893:Pachyrhinosaurus
884:
832:
792:
735:
730:
655:
636:
537:thermoregulation
354:
353:
350:
347:
344:
323:
318:
317:
316:
307:
300:
299:
294:
286:
279:
249:
248:
245:
242:
239:
229:dinosaur-related
214:
212:Dinosaurs portal
209:
208:
207:
198:
191:
190:
185:
177:
170:
153:
144:
143:
136:
135:
127:
118:Current status:
99:
80:
78:November 3, 2007
57:
23:
16:
1773:
1772:
1768:
1767:
1766:
1764:
1763:
1762:
1683:
1682:
1666:
1628:description of
1624:
1601:
1598:
1570:
1567:
1525:Montanoceratops
1324:C. It contains
1230:guidelines for
1228:manual of style
1163:
1148:
1143:
1111:
1104:have permission
1094:
1078:
1048:this simple FaQ
1033:
1018:186.221.136.197
1004:
953:
867:
815:
775:
762:
733:
728:
711:
669:
662:
644:193.217.196.189
637:
632:
622:("horned") and
519:in what is now
497:ser-a-TOP-ee-ah
489:
391:
351:
348:
345:
342:
341:
319:
314:
312:
292:
263:High-importance
246:
243:
240:
237:
236:
210:
205:
203:
184:High‑importance
183:
151:
141:
95:
76:
29:was one of the
12:
11:
5:
1771:
1769:
1761:
1760:
1755:
1750:
1745:
1740:
1735:
1730:
1725:
1720:
1715:
1710:
1705:
1700:
1695:
1685:
1684:
1665:
1662:
1639:Turanoceratops
1623:
1620:
1561:
1560:
1559:
1558:
1557:
1556:
1547:Pass or Fail:
1539:
1538:
1537:
1536:
1535:
1531:Psittacosaurus
1506:B. Images are
1504:
1503:
1502:
1478:A. Images are
1467:
1466:
1465:
1464:
1463:
1441:
1440:
1439:
1438:
1437:
1418:
1417:
1416:
1415:
1414:
1394:
1393:
1392:
1382:of the topic:
1369:
1368:
1367:
1366:
1365:
1346:
1345:
1344:
1322:
1321:
1320:
1292:
1291:
1290:
1263:
1262:
1261:
1260:
1259:
1240:words to watch
1224:
1223:
1222:
1178:
1177:
1162:
1159:
1138:
1137:
1130:
1063:
1062:
1054:Added archive
1032:
1029:
1003:
996:
995:
994:
984:144.178.207.62
952:
949:
948:
947:
946:
945:
944:
943:
923:
920:Psittacosaurus
916:
863:
862:
861:
860:
845:Psittacosaurus
834:
833:
822:86.159.176.213
810:
809:
794:
793:
773:By Mark Mitton
761:
758:
757:
756:
710:
707:
706:
705:
668:
665:
661:
658:
631:
628:
586:paleontologist
544:Psittacosaurus
503:is a group of
488:
485:
484:
483:
482:
481:
459:
458:
449:
448:
438:
437:
422:
421:
390:
387:
384:
383:
380:
379:
376:
375:
368:Mid-importance
364:
358:
357:
355:
338:the discussion
325:
324:
308:
296:
295:
293:Mid‑importance
287:
275:
274:
271:
270:
259:
253:
252:
250:
233:the discussion
216:
215:
199:
187:
186:
178:
166:
165:
159:
137:
123:
122:
115:
114:
111:
110:
107:
100:
92:
91:
88:
81:
73:
72:
69:
66:
62:
61:
53:
52:
24:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
1770:
1759:
1756:
1754:
1751:
1749:
1746:
1744:
1741:
1739:
1736:
1734:
1731:
1729:
1726:
1724:
1721:
1719:
1716:
1714:
1711:
1709:
1706:
1704:
1701:
1699:
1696:
1694:
1691:
1690:
1688:
1681:
1680:
1676:
1672:
1663:
1661:
1660:
1656:
1652:
1648:
1644:
1640:
1636:
1632:
1631:
1621:
1619:
1618:
1614:
1613:Contributions
1610:
1606:
1605:
1604:
1593:
1588:
1587:
1583:
1582:Contributions
1579:
1575:
1574:
1573:
1554:
1553:
1546:
1545:
1543:
1540:
1533:
1532:
1527:
1526:
1521:
1520:
1513:
1509:
1505:
1501:
1500:
1493:
1489:
1485:
1481:
1477:
1476:
1474:
1473:
1468:
1461:
1460:
1453:
1449:
1448:
1446:
1442:
1436:
1435:
1428:
1427:
1425:
1424:
1419:
1411:
1410:
1403:
1402:summary style
1399:
1395:
1389:
1388:
1381:
1377:
1376:
1374:
1370:
1363:
1362:
1355:
1351:
1347:
1342:
1341:
1335:
1334:
1327:
1323:
1317:
1316:
1309:
1305:
1301:
1297:
1293:
1289:
1288:
1281:
1277:
1276:
1274:
1270:
1269:
1264:
1257:
1256:
1249:
1245:
1241:
1237:
1233:
1232:lead sections
1229:
1225:
1219:
1218:
1211:
1210:
1208:
1204:
1203:
1202:
1201:
1199:
1196:review – see
1195:
1190:
1185:
1184:
1176:
1174:
1170:
1165:
1164:
1160:
1158:
1157:
1152:
1147:
1146:
1135:
1131:
1128:
1124:
1123:
1122:
1115:
1109:
1105:
1101:
1097:
1091:
1086:
1082:
1076:
1072:
1068:
1061:
1057:
1053:
1052:
1051:
1049:
1045:
1041:
1036:
1030:
1028:
1027:
1023:
1019:
1014:
1011:
1009:
1001:
997:
993:
989:
985:
981:
980:
979:
978:
974:
970:
966:
962:
958:
942:
938:
934:
930:
929:
924:
921:
917:
915:site for you.
913:
909:
908:
907:
903:
899:
895:
894:
889:
888:
887:
886:
885:
883:
879:
875:
871:
859:
855:
851:
846:
842:
838:
837:
836:
835:
831:
827:
823:
819:
812:
811:
808:
804:
800:
796:
795:
791:
787:
783:
779:
774:
772:
767:
766:
765:
759:
755:
751:
747:
743:
742:
741:
740:
737:
736:
731:
724:
721:
717:
715:
708:
704:
700:
696:
692:
691:
686:
685:
684:
683:
679:
675:
666:
664:
659:
657:
653:
649:
645:
641:
629:
627:
625:
621:
616:
614:
610:
606:
602:
598:
594:
590:
587:
582:
580:
579:
574:
573:
568:
564:
563:
562:Protoceratops
558:
554:
550:
546:
545:
539:
538:
534:
530:
526:
525:North America
522:
518:
514:
510:
507:and possibly
506:
502:
498:
494:
486:
480:
476:
472:
467:
466:
465:
464:
463:
457:
454:
451:
450:
447:
444:
440:
439:
436:
433:
430:
429:
428:
426:
420:
417:
413:
412:
411:
409:
405:
404:Please vote:
402:
400:
396:
388:
373:
369:
363:
360:
359:
356:
343:Palaeontology
339:
335:
334:palaeontology
331:
330:
322:
311:
309:
306:
302:
301:
297:
291:
290:Palaeontology
288:
285:
281:
268:
264:
258:
255:
254:
251:
234:
230:
226:
222:
221:
213:
202:
200:
197:
193:
192:
188:
182:
179:
176:
172:
167:
163:
157:
149:
148:
138:
134:
129:
128:
121:
116:
108:
106:
105:
101:
98:
97:July 16, 2018
94:
93:
89:
87:
86:
82:
79:
75:
74:
70:
67:
64:
63:
58:
54:
50:
49:
44:
40:
36:
35:
34:
28:
25:
22:
18:
17:
1667:
1643:once in 2010
1638:
1635:Zuniceratops
1634:
1630:Zuniceratops
1629:
1625:
1597:
1596:
1589:
1566:
1565:
1562:
1541:
1529:
1523:
1470:
1444:
1421:
1396:B. It stays
1380:main aspects
1372:
1338:
1272:
1266:
1207:well written
1206:
1200:for criteria
1192:
1189:Ornithischia
1181:
1179:
1166:
1142:
1139:
1114:source check
1093:
1087:
1074:
1070:
1066:
1064:
1037:
1034:
1015:
1012:
1005:
964:
960:
956:
954:
926:
919:
911:
891:
864:
844:
771:Ceratopsians
770:
763:
726:
712:
690:Gobiceratops
688:
674:68.205.68.57
670:
667:Bagaceratops
663:
633:
623:
619:
617:
608:
592:
583:
576:
572:Centrosaurus
570:
567:Ceratopsidae
560:
542:
540:
500:
496:
492:
490:
460:
424:
423:
407:
406:
403:
392:
367:
327:
262:
218:
162:WikiProjects
145:
119:
102:
84:
83:
48:reassessment
46:
31:
30:
26:
1482:with their
1169:transcluded
1081:Sourcecheck
928:Nigersaurus
874:71.65.88.78
868:—Preceding
816:—Preceding
782:24.79.4.163
776:—Preceding
769:omnivorous
638:—Preceding
609:Triceratops
605:taxonomists
578:Triceratops
553:quadrupedal
505:herbivorous
43:renominated
1687:Categories
1669:Downsi”.)
1354:plagiarism
1268:verifiable
1183:Rajasaurus
1151:Report bug
1040:Ceratopsia
959:Greek, it
898:J. Spencer
896:, please.
850:J. Spencer
746:J. Spencer
626:("face").
565:, and the
517:Cretaceous
509:omnivorous
501:Ceratopsia
425:Ceratopsia
27:Ceratopsia
1298:are from
1134:this tool
1127:this tool
969:Causantin
513:dinosaurs
493:Ceratopia
487:Ceratopia
453:Cas Liber
408:Ceratopia
395:Ceratopia
238:Dinosaurs
225:dinosaurs
181:Dinosaurs
150:is rated
1508:relevant
1452:edit war
1340:Aquilops
1198:WP:WIAGA
1140:Cheers.—
1008:Cerapoda
1000:Cerapoda
933:Dinoguy2
870:unsigned
818:unsigned
799:Dinoguy2
778:unsigned
695:Dinoguy2
652:contribs
640:unsigned
443:Dinoguy2
389:Untitled
109:Delisted
1592:WT:DINO
1542:Overall
1423:neutral
1294:B. All
1244:fiction
1067:checked
1044:my edit
595:ia" in
549:bipedal
533:species
511:beaked
399:Phlebas
370:on the
265:on the
152:C-class
68:Process
1486:, and
1480:tagged
1472:images
1445:stable
1443:Is it
1420:Is it
1413:group.
1371:Is it
1265:Is it
1246:, and
1236:layout
1205:Is it
1075:failed
557:horned
432:CFLeon
158:scale.
90:Listed
71:Result
1602:titan
1571:titan
1271:with
1171:from
957:Attic
620:keras
601:Greek
569:like
547:were
529:horns
499:) or
139:This
1675:talk
1655:talk
1645:and
1609:Talk
1599:Luso
1578:Talk
1568:Luso
1528:and
1352:nor
1071:true
1022:talk
988:talk
973:talk
965:have
937:talk
902:talk
878:talk
854:talk
826:talk
803:talk
786:talk
750:talk
699:talk
678:talk
648:talk
630:Jaws
613:ICZN
597:1890
584:The
575:and
521:Asia
475:talk
471:MWAK
416:MWAK
257:High
227:and
65:Date
1404:):
1108:RfC
1085:).
1073:or
1058:to
1016:--
734:466
624:ops
410::
362:Mid
1689::
1677:)
1657:)
1637:,
1615:)
1611:|
1584:)
1580:|
1544::
1514::
1494::
1475:?
1447:?
1426:?
1375:?
1356::
1328::
1310::
1282::
1275:?
1250::
1242:,
1238:,
1234:,
1209:?
1194:GA
1121:.
1116:}}
1112:{{
1083:}}
1079:{{
1024:)
990:)
975:)
961:is
939:)
904:)
880:)
856:)
828:)
805:)
788:)
752:)
729:JN
722::
701:)
680:)
650:•
581:.
477:)
427::
414:--
1673:(
1653:(
1607:(
1576:(
1153:)
1149:(
1136:.
1129:.
1020:(
986:(
971:(
935:(
922:.
900:(
876:(
852:(
824:(
801:(
784:(
748:(
697:(
676:(
646:(
593:s
495:(
473:(
374:.
269:.
164::
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.
