Talk:Palaeosaurus

remowed the dino-stub template because i could not find any recent source supporting it is a dinosaur. Especially when it comes from the permian. Why was it included to the List of Dinosaurs?? --Dudo2 17:43, 25 April 2006 (UTC)

Wow! Top job. Talk about confusion, eh? Dudo2, it was included in the list of dinosaurs because according to this excellent article, at least some of the remains belong to a dinosaur, and it was classified as a dinosaur. --Gazzster 10:47, 21 December 2006 (UTC)

Taxonomy of Paleosaurus
This page needs a taxobox. Paleosaurus Riley & Stutchbury, 1840 is the correct name for the reptile that was going to be named Palaeosaurus Riley & Stutchbury, 1840. George Olshevsky (pers. comm., Apr. 26, 2000 ) demonstrated Palaeosaurus Riley & Stutchbury, 1836 to be a nomen nudum for Paleosaurus Riley & Stutchbury, 1840. Palaeosauriscus Kuhn, 1959 is therefore a junior synonym of Paleosaurus Riley & Stutchbury, 1840. Therefore, Palaeosaurus is a nomen nudum for Paleosaurus Riley & Stutchbury, 1840. The type species is Paleosaurus platyodon Riley & Stutchbury, 1840, with the other species being P. cylindrodon Riley & Stutchbury, 1840, P. stricklandi Davis, 1881.

Benton, MJ, L Juul, GW Storrs, & PM Galton (2000), Anatomy and systematics of the prosauropod dinosaur Thecodontosaurus antiquus from the Upper Triassic of Southwest England. J. Vert. Paleontol. 20: 77-108.

Palaeosaurus Fitzinger, 1840 is actually a synonym of Sphenosaurus von Meyer, 1847 (George Olshevsky, pers. comm. Aug. 10, 2002, http://dml.cmnh.org/2002Aug/msg00273.html). The taxonomic history of Sphenosaurus is shown here:

Sphenosaurus von Meyer, 1847* = Palaeosaurus Fitzinger, 1840/Geoffroy Saint-Hilaire, 1833 S. sternbergii (Fitzinger, 1840) von Meyer, 1847 = Palaeosaurus sternbergii Fitzinger, 1840 = Palaeosauriscus sternbergii (Fitzinger, 1840) Olshevsky, 1991 = Paleosaurus sternbergii (Fitzinger, 1840) Olshevsky, 2000 = Sclerosaurus sternbergii (Fitzinger, 1840) von Huene, 1902

Is Palaeosaurus fraserianus a dinosaur or a phytosaur?

For the reasons given above, update the Paleosaurus page immediately. 72.194.116.63 20:26, 19 February 2007 (UTC) Vahe Demirjian. 12.25. 19 February 2007

Clepsysaurus
Clepsysaurus redirects here, but isn't mentioned a single time. Someone address this, please. Bob the Wikipedian (talk • contribs) 05:21, 18 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Er...well, I tried Googling it but every single site I found says it's either a reptile (and nothing else) or the whole thing is literally cut-and-pasted from...well, from this very page. I'll try some more and see what comes up. Crimsonraptor &#124; (Contact me) Dumpster dive if you must 13:57, 24 December 2010 (UTC)

February 2014 merge proposal

 * Oppose As it stands the name "Palaeosauriscus" is an invalid genus. However the three species that had been assigned to it over the years were placed into three different genera, not all into Palaeosaurus, and "Palaeosauriscus" is not considered a synonym.-- Kev  min  § 00:15, 21 February 2014 (UTC)

"Geoffrey Saint-Hilaire" = Étienne Geoffroy Saint-Hilaire?
Article says: Riley and Stutchbury did not mean to assign these species to Geoffrey Saint-Hilaire's genus ... Is this the naturalist Étienne Geoffroy Saint-Hilaire? - and should we therefore link to that article?

-- 189.122.51.140 (talk) 19:01, 5 July 2018 (UTC)

Yes, based on the information in this source, it seems that it is indeed Étienne Geoffroy Saint-Hilaire (it's part of a French biographical work written by his son, Isidore Geoffroy Saint-Hilaire):

https://books.google.ca/books?id=QCU6AAAAcAAJ&pg=PA445

His usage of the term Palaeosaurus appears to be for a genus within the family Teleosauridae; however, it doesn't appear to be used for this purpose anymore, and the reason for this is unclear (it was either renamed, merged with another genus, or moved to another family). Regardless, I will at very least update the name and link it to the respective article.

-- 156.57.182.137 (talk) 00:46, 21 November 2018 (UTC)