User talk:Junsik1223: Difference between revisions

Papers suggested they were nomen dubium, but I wonder if it was formal or if they are still valid taxa currently (though future papers depends). Huinculsaurus (talk) 13:30, 25 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

It doesn’t matter what we think; if at least one academic paper suggested that the taxon name is dubious, then it’s important to state that the taxon is potentially dubious which is exactly why I stated as such. Junsik1223 (talk) 19:00, 25 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

hello you keep undoing my edits to allosaurus eurpaeus. there are hardly any size estimates for it avialable and Molina Perez & Paul are the only ones providing estimates. and theirs fallacies in your argument

for one the links you sent me indicated that such sources can be used in citing the estimates, but it should be worded correctly, like “this author in a book estimated this taxon at this size.” such an avenue was suggested by Jen’s L.

plus I’ll say this again, Molina perez and his estimates are used on many pages for size estimates, so clearly they are not as unreliable as you indicate.

its also worth pointing out that Greg paul in later editions of Princeton field guides lime in 2024 stated that allosaurus europaeus size is uncertain, so the estimate you have there is questionable. a europaeus needs more size estimates included and Paul’s updates on europaeus need to be included, so heres a compromise edit (crude draft real thing will be more properly cited.

“Due to incomplete remains, the size of A. europaeus has been difficult to estimate. (citation:Princeton field guide to dinosaurs 3rd edition) Gregory S. Paul estimated A. europaeus as 7 meters and 1 tonne in 2010. (Princeton field guide to dinosaurs edition one) Molina-Perez and Laramendi estimated a size of 7.8m and 1.3 tonnes in 2019. ( theropod facts and figures).”

this fits in line with one of the avenues Jens offered in those links you sent.

“Whenever original research from a popular book is presented, including size estimates, we need to make that very clear directly in the text (e.g., “In 2020, paleontologist X stated in a popular book that”). — Jens Lallensack”

Themanguything (talk) 17:23, 12 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

What do you mean I keep reverted you? I’ve only reverted a single edit of yours. I don’t think I’ve ever interacted with you before the Allosaurus article? Junsik1223 (talk) 17:28, 12 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Oh wait I did interact with you before in fact 3 years ago (but that is the only time I could remember I ever interacted with you). Sorry about the confusion. But regardless, I have stated clearly why it is not ideal for inclusion when there is another published estimate. Junsik1223 (talk) 17:31, 12 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]