Talk:Hemicyonidae

Impossible Weight Claim
In the revision of 18 November 2009 by Noles1984, the following edit was made: They were about 1.50 m (5 ft) long, 70 centimeters (28 inches) tall, with somewhat tiger-like proportions and dog-like teeth weighing as much as 689.3 kg (1,500 lb).

Such a heavy weight looks extremely dubious, given the dog-size body of this animal, For comparison, look at the article on polar bears: Adult males weigh 350–680 kg (770–1500 lbs) and measure 2.4–3 m (7.9–9.8 ft) in length.Adult females are roughly half the size of males and normally weigh 150–249 kg (330–550 lb), measuring 1.8–2.4 metres (5.9–7.9 ft) in length.

Tigers in turn weigh up to 300 kg (660 lbs). I'd venture to say that there may have been a mistake with the decimal point: for a dog-size animal, a maximal weight of 68.9 kg, or around 150 lbs, seems far more likely. I therefore changed this figure to one-tenth of the original value. If a fellow Wikipedian should disagree, please provide proof. Textor (talk) 20:21, 4 March 2011 (UTC)


 * Actually, as written in your first paragraph, it is the animal's teeth that weigh 1,500 lb! (Of course there is some uncertainty as to whether the weight applies to each tooth or to the set). Fortunately, the actual article does include the comma before weighing, which shifts the meaning. This is a brilliant illustration as to why correct punctuation is important.

Earliest Hemicyonid
The last sentence under Taxonomy says the earliest known occurrence of the hemicyonids was in Spain, 22.8–20 Ma. Yet the very next sentence, under Genus Identification says 'Hemicyonids lived continuously in Europe; the oldest known being Cephalogale, which existed from ~33.9 to 20 Ma.'

Which, if either, is correct?Glevum (talk) 04:09, 27 July 2012 (UTC)
 * I amended the time range in the taxobox, and rewrote/removed the contradictory sentence, and also amended Phoberocyon, too.--Mr Fink (talk) 05:07, 27 July 2012 (UTC)

Copyright issue
This article was created by a contributor with an unfortunate history of copying content from other sources. (See Contributor copyright investigations/20130908) I'm sorry to say that this seems to have tainted this article as well. For one example, compare the following:

This comes from here.

The article currently says:

This is just one example. Given the history of the contributor, all of his content should be considered suspect.

In accordance with our copyright policies (see C and WP:CV), the article should be rewritten to eliminate all text added by the original contributor, unless we are able to verify that certain texts are not copied. This is difficult to do, I'm afraid, particularly as in some other articles he has utilized content behind a pay wall. --Moonriddengirl (talk) 16:05, 8 September 2013 (UTC)