Talk:South Polar region of the Cretaceous

message: Am I right in thinking there was no polar ice cap during the Cretaceous? If so, this needs to be said in the article, to clarify the section on climate. The Singing Badger 15:49, 11 Nov 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: Indeed there was no icecap. There was a six-month night, however. --Wetman 15:54, 11 Nov 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: Should this article's title simply be Polar dinosaurs? It deals with dinosaurs found in both Australia and Antarctica and indeed it's not logical to treat the continents separately since they were joined together at the time. The Singing Badger 17:36, 11 Nov 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Move page?

message: The ability of polar dinosaurs to survive a cold polar night makes it almost certain they were endothermic. I think it's worth of notion in the article.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.166.232.135 (talk) 01:51, 16 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Endothermic dinosaurs 

message: "Given that the dinosaurs and other fauna of Cretaceous were well adapted for living in long periods of dark and cold weather, it has been postulated that this community might have survived the Cretaceous-Tertiary extinction event which exterminated the non-avian dinosaurs .... 'Reports earlier this year that dwarf mammoths survived to early historical times, in islands off the coast of Siberia, give force to such speculation.' " -- I should think that this comparison is pretty shaky, given that mammoths were probably killed off by primates with pointy sticks, and dinosaurs (quite likely) by an asteroid impact. - You can run, but you sure can't hide. -- 201.53.7.16 (talk) 11:23, 26 September 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: No. Mammoths died out due to climatic changes.  Their grassland-prairies warmed up and became forested, and so their food supply disappeared. 98.67.1.188 (talk) 01:59, 29 October 2015 (UTC)

text: The last section is only pure speculation by however added it. I could barely find a source I will keep looking. However it is good speculation, but please add your speculation somewhere else.(Bubblesorg (talk) 01:49, 26 May 2018 (UTC)

text: Even the "well-adapted to cold" dinosaurs must only apply to those with feathers - any sauropod or ankylosaur would have had to migrated out of the dark, frosty areas during winter.104.169.43.46 (talk) 04:07, 26 January 2019 (UTC)
thread_title: Survival of mammoths vs dinosaurs

message: This is the problem with Paleocene dinosaurs section. 
:I remember in one of the journals I read (one of them by P. Vickers-Rich), It compared the Antarctic dinosaurs to the mammoths, so if you’re saying the problem’s unreliable source, it’s not, it’s just not presenting all sides of the argument. I’m sure there are sources that say to the contrary a bit more strongly   User:Dunkleosteus77 |push to talk  20:11, 31 May 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  I found a problem 

message: I need help on this.--Bubblesorg (talk) 18:56, 27 June 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: Write about the Eromanga Sea and using your own judgement, based on the size of the paragraph(s) you wrote, make a decision where it should go. You can do this   User:Dunkleosteus77 |push to talk  19:08, 27 June 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Where should we put  Eromanga sea section? 

message: I did not list this under a GA Review, both because I have edited the article quite a bit and it would be like a "COI" of some kind, but also because I think this is more like a pre-review.
* the prose is not really good to be honest. And Dunkleosteus changed an addition I made "among others" to "and so forth", which would be even worse, as it is not professional language to use such wording imho.
::I always used “among others” as informal and “so forth” as professional   User:Dunkleosteus77 |push to talk  17:28, 11 October 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Not a GA review, but comments 

message: I would rather call it South Polar region IN the Cretaceous, analogous to France in the Middle ages. In my view, the current title assumes that a region is part of an era. But they are fundamentally different types of phenomena. In other words: Doesn't the current title imply that a region is part of an era and isn't that wrong? 
I would also suggest that The should be added in the beginning. --Ettrig (talk) 10:22, 9 October 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: Well it’d be like saying “Temperate rainforests of the Pacific Northwest,” it doesn’t imply temperate rainforests only exist in the Pacific Northwest   User:Dunkleosteus77 |push to talk  16:16, 9 October 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: This does not speak to the problem posed. It is awkward to speak about an area OF a time period. Would you rather choose to say France OF the Middle ages OR France IN the Middle ages? --Ettrig (talk) 08:54, 11 October 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: I think it depends on the items because I can say “Temperate forests of the Cretaceous” and I cannot say “Pacific Northwest of the Cretaceous,” but it seems right to say “Pacific Northwest Region of the Cretaceous” and “Frankish Region of the Middle Ages” (though “in” is also acceptable)   User:Dunkleosteus77 |push to talk  17:23, 11 October 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Isn't the title wrong? 

message: Temperate rainforests near the South Pole during peak Cretaceous warmth, Published today in NatureHemiauchenia (talk) 15:56, 1 April 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  New paper on paleoclimate