Talk:Thecodont

There is a dead link in the external links section Clf99 (talk) 22:17, 14 July 2011 (UTC)

"They constitute an evolutionary grade of animals..." This is vague and doesn't transmit information. Can't it be dropped, so that the sentence reads "They constitute a "wastebin taxon" for any archosaur that wasn't a crocodilian..." --Wetman 05:49, 23 September 2005 (UTC)


 * Sure. But they also constitute a paraphyletic "grade" - so one could say a wastebin taxon of Basal Archosaurs  M Alan Kazlev 01:16, 24 September 2005 (UTC)

If paleontologists existed in the mid-triassic, then thecodontia would be a legitimate clade and synonymous to archosauriformes.--94.65.90.244 (talk) 01:43, 20 May 2010 (UTC)

Thecodont vs thecodontia
Should this page be moved to thecodontia in order to make room for a short page on thecodont dentition? The latter is not taxonomy, but rather just defines the anatomy - mammals and crocs both have thecodont dentition, for instance. Mokele (talk) 23:03, 24 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Good idea! Petter Bøckman (talk) 13:56, 16 September 2011 (UTC)
 * While disambiguating Thecodont, I changed the entry on the disambiguation page for Thecodont dentition to a link, then created a redirect for that link to Thecodontia because until the dentition article is written, that seemed like it had the most useful information regarding the topic. The article on Thecodont dentition still needs to be written even though it shows as a blue link on the disambiguation page. Hope that was helpful. Thank you. SchreiberBike (talk) 17:48, 6 September 2012 (UTC)