Wikipedia:WikiProject Dinosaurs/Image review/Archive June 2007

?

Shortcut:

WP:DINOART

Dinosaur Image Review Archives

Archives

Current Automatic Archives Archive 1 Archive 2 Archive 3 Archive 4 Old Manual Archives June - October 2006 November 2006 December 2006 January 2007 February - March 2007 April - May 2007 June 2007 July - August 2007 September - December 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 - 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 January - April 2018 May - August 2018 September - December 2018 January - April 2019 May - August 2019 September - December 2019 January - April 2020

• Current Image Review Page

---

• Gallery of approved images

---

• Requested Image List

This page is mainly for reviewing the accuracy of dinosaur life restorations (usually by the artists themselves, but anyone who wants an image scrutinized is welcome to post it for review). Any other image, such as size comparisons or photos of skeletal mounts, can also be posted here to review their accuracy.

If you want to submit dinosaur images for accuracy review, place them here as well as links to what you used as references. If you want to participate as reviewer, you can put the page on your watchlist. New images of any type can also be requested by including "Request:" in the section title; if submitted, such an image will thereafter be reviewed here. Sections are archived automatically after some time when a discussion stalls, to encourage speedy responses from both artists and reviewers. It is allowed to revive sections if they have been archived before being resolved, unlike regular talk page archives.

Modifications of previously uploaded amateur restorations to correct anatomical inaccuracies is encouraged (including by others than the original artists), but modifications of historical restorations are discouraged, as these should be used to show historical ideas. Modifications to restorations published in peer-reviewed journals should be uploaded as separate files, so that both versions are available.

Images that have been deemed inaccurate should be tagged with the Wikimedia Commons template "Inaccurate paleoart"[5] (which automatically adds the "Inaccurate paleoart" category[6]), so they can be prevented from being used and easily located for correction. User created images are not considered original research, per WP:OI and WP:PERTINENCE^[a], but it is appreciated if sources used are listed in file descriptions (this is often requested during WP:Featured Article reviews).

For reviews of non-dinosaur paleoart, see WikiProject Palaeontology's paleoart review page:

Criteria sufficient for using an image:

• See Guidelines for dinosaur restorations for minimum requirements for anatomical accuracy in dinosaur restorations used in articles.

• If an image is included for historical value, the image caption should explain that it is an outdated reconstruction. Images of historical interest should not be used in the taxobox or paleobox, but preferably in a section of the text discussing the history of a taxon.

Criteria for removing an image:

• Images should not speculate unnecessarily beyond what has been indicated by reliable sources. Therefore, depicting overly speculative physical features, behaviors, and pathologies should be avoided, to prevent WP:OR issues. Restorations that show serious pathologies known from fossil evidence are welcome, but should not be used as the main representation of a given taxon. These should instead show healthy, typical individuals, and not focus on unknown areas of their anatomy. Since Wikipedia is an encyclopaedia rather than an art gallery, it is not the place for artistic experimentation, and we cannot include every piece of available artwork.

• Image differs appreciably from known skeletal elements.
  • Example: A Deinonychus reconstructed with four fingers.

• Image differs appreciably from implied skeletal elements (via phylogenetic bracketing).
  • Example: An oviraptorid known only from postcranial elements reconstructed with teeth, a feature made highly improbable by its phylogenetic position.

• Image differs appreciably from known non-skeletal elements.
  • Example: An image of Microraptor lacking primary feathers.

• Image differs appreciably from implied non-skeletal elements.
  • Example: A Nomingia depicted without feathers, since a skeletal feature (the pygostyle) and phylogenetic bracketing (more advanced than Caudipteryx) imply that it was feathered.
  • Example: A Ceratosaurus depicted with advanced feathers, since a skeletal feature (osteoderms) and its proximity to Carnotaurus (extensive scale impressions) imply that it lacked advanced feathers.
  • The discovery of Kulindadromeus and integument in exceptionally preserved heterodontosaurids provides evidence for some form of filamentous integument being the plesiomorphic condition in Ornithischia. As loss of filamentous integument is well known in many dinosaur clades, skin impressions and thermodynamic considerations should be given priority over phylogenetic bracketing.

• Image pose differs appreciably from known range of motion.
  • Example: Theropod dinosaurs reconstructed with overly flexed tails or pronated "bunny-style" hands.
  • Exception: If the range of motion is debated in the scientific literature, as is the case with sauropod neck position.

• Image differs appreciably from known size estimates.
  • Example: An image of an adult Torvosaurus which shows it being as large as an adult Apatosaurus.
  • Exception: If the size of the animal is contested or the individual in question is a gigantism-inflicted individual.

• Image differs appreciably from known physiological constraints.
  • Example: An image of a dinosaur urinating, giving birth to live young, or making vocal sounds with its jaw, all made unlikely by phylogenetic position and physical constraints (archosaurs less basal then songbirds likely could not vocalize too much, if at all).

• Image seems heavily inspired by another piece of media or directly copied from it.
  • Example: A image of Tyrannosaurus or Velociraptor depicting them as they appear in Jurassic Park being used in the articles on the genera, or an illustration of Deinonychus being a direct trace of another illustration of the same genus.

• Image depicts a scene which is anachronistic or contradicts known geographic range.
  • Example: Megalosaurus bucklandii chasing an Nanosaurus agilis, two animals which did not live together.
  • Example: Dinosaurs from the Triassic or Jurassic depicted walking on grass, which did not exist at that time.
  • Exception: Photographs of life-sized models taken in parks. It should be made clear in the caption that these are models.

Approved images: Images that have been approved by the Wikipedia:WikiProject Dinosaurs team can now be found at Category:Approved dinosaur images. Images that have been deemed inaccurate should be placed in the Wikimedia Commons category "Inaccurate dinosaur restorations"[7], so they can be easily located for correction.