Talk:Velociraptor

message: The jurassic park velociraptors are based off of deinonychus, AKA Velociraptor antirrhopus. Velociraptor (Deinonychus) in the movie is named correctly but is commonly confused with Velociraptor mongoliensis. 
:The book and movie didn't name them correctly, they used "velociraptor" because it sounded cooler, while they were actually thinking of Deinonychus. This is mentioned in several places. They intentionally used the wrong name. The andf (talk) 21:29, 1 August 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: That is already mentioned in the article. FunkMonk (talk) 17:49, 11 February 2020 (UTC)

text: That is literally covered in the article already. "They portrayed the animals with the size, proportions, and snout shape of Deinonychus rather than Velociraptor." Lythronaxargestes (talk | contribs) 17:42, 12 February 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: In the wider sense, we could have more about diagnostic features of Velociraptor and how it differs from other dromaeosaurs in general. But there is no reason to focus specifically on its differences with Deinonychus just because of a movie. FunkMonk (talk) 21:36, 12 February 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: Fair point, many of our older FAs could use some discussion of diagnostic features... Lythronaxargestes (talk | contribs) 21:53, 12 February 2020
I think the article should at least mention the existence of Velociraptor Antirrhopus (Using the name Velociraptor Antirrhopus instead of deinonychus). I also think that when talking about the jurassic park velociraptor inaccuracies we should mention that it is accurate in size to antirrhopus, not mongoliensis, which this article is about.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by MeatsByDrDre (talk • contribs) 17:48, 13 February 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Jurassic Park velociraptors 

message: Much of the article Velociraptor in popular culture already has what this article (and the Deinonychus article) talks about under the "Cultural significance" section, and is almost entirely made up of what this article's section covers with similar cited sources. It also has a number of uncited (and potentially "headcanon") claims, and its overall layout goes against as to what Wikipedia's goal is.
Article: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Velociraptor_in_popular_culture
Could this be where both Velociraptor and Velociraptor in popular culture can be merged together, considering how much of its layout is made up of what the Velociraptor article covers already in one section? 2600:1700:9770:6760:E4B1:EC23:7962:964B (talk) 21:15, 20 February 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: I'd agree with that. FunkMonk (talk) 21:44, 20 February 2022 (UTC)

text: Support merge, though the merged material will need some condensing into a more concise form. Happy editing, SilverTiger12 (talk) 02:02, 4 August 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merging of the "Velociraptor in popular culture" article into this? 

message: Why am I seeing a Jurassic World Velociraptor image? And when I click the image, why does it turns back to the accurate reconstruction? (BTW this happens when I'm using a computer not my phone, so I find this very weird.) Junsik1223 (talk) 09:43, 29 October 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: That is very strange. It's fine for me on desktop, and neither the article nor the image have changed recently. If you have a screenshot maybe you could try posting at WP:VPT? Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 11:32, 29 October 2022 (UTC)

text: I don't see that on this page. Which image? For instance if I click on the first image, then click on "More details" it goes to a page which says at the top File:Velociraptor skeleton white background.jpg. Thanks.  SchreiberBike | ⌨  11:37, 29 October 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: Hi, I also noticed the issue Junsik1223 mentioned. The problematic image is File:Velociraptor Restoration.png in the Paleobiology "Feathers" section. In the actual article, the image appears to be of a velociraptor from Jurassic World, but if I click on the image or go to "More details", it shows a picture of an orange velociraptor with feathers. -- KomradeKalashnikov (talk) 21:23, 12 March 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: File:Velociraptor_mongoliensis.jpg in the Paleoenvironment "Djadochta Formation" section also has the same issue. -- KomradeKalashnikov (talk) 22:15, 12 March 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Must be something with your cache, that revision of the image has long been deleted, as you can see if you click on the thumbnail and see the full image. Try purging the page. FunkMonk (talk) 23:11, 12 March 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: I tried purging the page, but the issue is still there. I'm going to take it to WP:VPT. -- KomradeKalashnikov (talk) 23:32, 12 March 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Ok, TheDJ did something with the files and it should be fixed now. -- KomradeKalashnikov (talk) 16:11, 13 March 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Is there a bug in the website? 

message: The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion:
* 
You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 05:53, 30 October 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion 

message: https://paleobiodb.org/classic/checkTaxonInfo?taxon_no=38564&is_real_user=1 84.14.94.232 (talk) 14:13, 9 June 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Based on this website (certified by NSF). Velociraptors lived between -89 Ma to -72 Ma. 

message: It at one point says Velociraptor could reach as tall as 6.8ft, but then goes on to say that they were not as big as the 6.6ft dinosaurs depicted in Jurassic Park. 2600:4040:9165:CA00:4968:B6CB:4178:1565 (talk) 04:09, 9 October 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: It says Velociraptor could be 6.8 feet long, not 6.8 feet tall. Because Velociraptor's back was horizontal and it had a long tail, it was about six feet long but only about two feet tall. The Jurassic Park Velociraptors were six feet tall. Ornithopsis (talk) 16:46, 9 October 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: It also says they are about the size of a turkey which does not seem to be correct. 69.181.154.23 (talk) 04:57, 30 October 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Agree it is quite confusing. Turkeys are not 1.5–2.07 m long. Per turkey: . Vpab15 (talk) 18:17, 30 October 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: If turkeys were the same overall size but had a long tail like Velociraptor they would be much more than 125 cm long. Domestic turkeys can reach nearly 40 kg, which is actually probably larger than a Velociraptor by mass. In other words, Velociraptor is slightly larger than a wild turkey and smaller but more elongate than a large domestic turkey—I think that it's fair to say it's "roughly the size of a turkey" given that. Ornithopsis (talk) 03:54, 31 October 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: More importantly, though, the turkey part is unsourced, and only stated in the intro, which should not contain info not present in the article body. So we'll have to remove it regardless of how accurate it is if we can't find a reliable source for it. FunkMonk (talk) 06:18, 15 November 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Am I mistaken, or does the intro to the article contradict itself on the size of the Velociraptor?