Talk:Rhamphorhynchus

Size?
Can someone confirm the size? 7 inches long with a 1 meter wing span (doesn't sound aerodynamic to me but that's just notoriously unreliable intuition)? RJFJR 06:31, Mar 4, 2005 (UTC)
 * Sounds about right to me, intuition is worse than unreliable when it come to aerodynamics :-). But I will check this - in any case, the different species of Rhamphorhynchus differed widely in wingspan, and the article should reflect this. John.Conway 17:49, 23 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Also a horrible mix of archaic and metric measures! It needs to be updated to all metric - MPF 17:47, 25 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Most of the Rhamphorhynchus "species" is now considered to be diffrent growth stages of a single specie. Wingspan varied from 30 cm to above 1 m Fornadan (t) 18:46, 3 February 2006 (UTC)
 * 17,5 cm with a 1 m wingspan sounds very short for a creature with such a long tail. Most (if not all) reconstructions (the one in the article being an obvious example) depict Rhamphorhynchus with a tail about as long as one of its wings, meaning it would be approximately 60-75 cm long. Jerkov 14:58, 4 June 2006 (UTC)

Picture
Can we find a picture (photo of fossil, artist conception of animal)? RJFJR 06:31, Mar 4, 2005 (UTC)
 * Done, though a photo of one of the specimens with soft tissue preserved would be good. John.Conway 17:49, 23 December 2005 (UTC)

Rhamphorhynchus (reptile)
I'm not happy with this designation. I think either Rhamphorhynchus (animal) or Rhamphorhynchus (pterosaur) would be more appropriate. I'm leaning towards Rhamphorhynchus (animal) because ICZN rules do not allow overlap overlap of names between animals, so it's not like there can be a Rhamphorhynchus (mammal), for example. If I don't get any counter arguments, I'm going to move it. John.Conway 17:49, 23 December 2005 (UTC)


 * Agree with Rhamphorhynchus (animal). - MPF 17:47, 25 December 2005 (UTC)


 * Shouldn't this article be moved back to "Rhamphorhynchus (pterosaur)" for consistency? Other pterosaurs and dinosaurs that share names with plants or places say for example "Anhanguera (pterosaur)" and "Gastonia (dinosaur)". The article was moved from pterosaur to animal here FunkMonk (talk) 01:08, 10 January 2009 (UTC)


 * You bring up an interesting point, but I'm happy with whatever is chosen, provided it's not something really off-the-wall that requires an understanding of classification in order to pick the correct article. Nichollsia was easy for me to separate, since one was a crustacean and the other a plesiosaur.  But they were both animals, so the distinction was necessary. Bob the Wikipedian (talk • contribs) 01:43, 10 January 2009 (UTC)
 * I was thinking this too, especially since the other Rhamphorhynchus is at (orchid) not (plant). Dinoguy2 (talk) 02:39, 10 January 2009 (UTC)

Status of German Rhamphorhynchus
Bennett (1995) demonstrated that all German specimens of Rhamphorhynchus represent one species, Rhamphorhynchus muensteri.R. intermedius, R. longiceps, R. longicaudus, and R. gemmingi are synonyms of R. muensteri. The only other valid species of Rhamporhynchus are R. jessoni from the UK and R. tendagurensis from Tanzania.

Bennett, S. C., 1995. A statistical study of Rhamphorhynchus from the Solnhofen Limestone of Germany: Year-classes of a single large species. Journal of Paleontology, 69:569-580.

Ornithocephalus longicaudatus, Pterodactylus longicaudatus, and Rhamphorhynchus longicaudatus are actually spelling errors for Rhamphorhynchus longicaudus (= Rhamphorhynchus muensteri) (http://dml.cmnh.org/2001Nov/msg00612.html).

I doubt that Pterodactylus grandis and Pterodactylus giganteus are referrable to Rhamphorhynchus because they are nomina dubia. Did Bennett (1995) regard these as synonymous with R. muensteri? I think they're probably Pterodactylus species instead.

Ornithopterus lavateri (von Meyer, 1838) [originally Pterodactylus] may turn out be a distinct genus of rhamphorhynchoid, because it is considered a nomen dubium. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 72.194.116.63 (talk) 18:50, 29 December 2006 (UTC).
 * Unwin 2006 only lists 2 species and R. 'longiceps', so I'll remove the other synonyms. Dinoguy2 21:05, 29 December 2006 (UTC)

Too many images?
There's a sheer amount of images in this article, and the article itself is too short for all of these images. Some of these are likely unnecessary life restorations since there are already a few of them. So perhaps we could remove a few of these images? Jurassic Classic 767 (talk &#124; contribs) 21:08, 13 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Yeah, perhaps some of them can also be grouped in double images... FunkMonk (talk) 21:30, 13 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Huh, the double images do save some space, though I still removed one of the restorations since there are just too many of them. Jurassic Classic 767  (talk &#124; contribs) 16:51, 14 January 2021 (UTC)