This article is written in American English, which has its own spelling conventions (color, defense, traveled) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus.
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 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 article is perhaps a bit too technical. I've a feeling most readers will not understand most of the content in this article. Technical terms such as squasomal should at least be wikilinked, so that people can find out what a squasomal bone is, and the content should generally be encyclopedic, but not resemble a formal scientific description. Comments?--Firsfron 16:55, 29 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The only portion of the article which I might question as being too technical for layreaders would be the diagnosis, but I've been including diagnoses on most of my articles, when available, as the distinctions between closely related taxa often come down to very, very fine points of morphology. I do agree that there should be links to articles describing anatomical elements such as the squamosal, and I always include them when they're available. Unfortunately, a great many skeletal elements have yet to get Wikipedia articles.--Nar'eth 17:02, 29 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I just noticed this myself. Mea culpa. Carry on.--Firsfron 17:11, 29 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
No problem. :-) I'm going to try to get anatomy stubs up for many more elements of the vertebrate skull. I just did one for squamosal.--Nar'eth 17:24, 29 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
