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
This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions.
This article has been automatically rated by a bot or other tool because one or more other projects use this class. Please ensure the assessment is correct before removing the |auto= parameter.
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
This page has archives. Sections older than 90 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 3 sections are present.
The contents of the Coelophysis bauri page were merged into Coelophysis. For the contribution history and old versions of the redirected page, please see its history; for the discussion at that location, see its talk page. (4 July 2018)
This might be outdated but I remember reading somewhere that Rioarribasaurus was given to a more complete specimen. I feel that the way this article mentions Rioarribasaurus fails to properly bring up the the fact that people have debated over which name should be given to the dinosaur. Ceratosaur635 (talk) 15:16, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
This is discussed in detail under Classification as far as I can see? Should probably be under history/discovery, though. FunkMonk (talk) 07:55, 4 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Ah my apologies it must not have popped out to me. Thank you for the clarification. Ceratosaur635 (talk) 16:51, 4 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
level-5 vital article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
