Talk:Ohmdenosaurus

message: The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion:
* 
Participate in the deletion discussion at the . —Community Tech bot (talk) 01:32, 26 December 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion 

message: I have been sampling data from the "Posidonienschiefer" formation for years. There are a few corrections needed in the article:
A) To begin with, the shales of the unit do not reach the "Middle" (Traditionally Bifrons-Variabilis Biozones) Toarcian. The right shale levels are part of the early (approx. 3 Myr) tenuicostatum and falciferum biozones. The Unterer Schiefer belongs to the lowest (Exaratum) subzone of the 2nd, which makes sense, as it correlates with one of the sea level maxs measured at nearby Dotternhausen. 
The 2023 paper that summs that is: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0031018223002377 
B) Riegraf (1985) made a very detailed facies inventory of this unit, finding evidence of non-anoxic shallow-water carbonate sandstone ('Glaukonit und viel Feinsand'; demonstrated by increased oxygenic water biota, especially sponges and echinoderms) in the Black Forest Massif area at Obereggenen im Breisgau. The next coastal outcrop is at Regensburg, where carbonate sandstone platform is detected.
Recently was suggested that a Plesiosaur with quartz gastroliths probably went there.
*
I will add another 2022 paper that summs nearby emerged landmasses and Palynology: 
Yewtharaptor (talk) 17:47, 12 December 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Paging @Jens Lallensack The Morrison Man (talk) 18:19, 12 December 2023 (UTC)
replies: text:  Thank you for your input, and for discussing on the talk page. As you see, I only did a partial revert and kept your change regarding middle Toarcian vs early Toarcian. Regarding the landmasses, I did not quite understand the text you added to the article. Do I understand correctly that the Black Forest is now considered to be the closest landmass, and not the Vindelician High? If so, then I don't see how this is supported by the source you provided (the source needs to state this explicitly; we are not allowed to do WP:Synth). If it was something else you wanted to correct: Please let me know, precisely, what the errors are, what the correction would be, and where (ideally with page number) these corrections are supported by the sources. Thank you. --Jens Lallensack (talk) 19:49, 12 December 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: The Black Forest Massif is the closest, closer than the Vindelician Land and the Bohemian Massif: "The nearest regions where such environments may have existed during the early Toarcian were the Black Forest, Vosges and the Jura Massif, which were presumably emergent at this time" (Vincet et al., 2017 quoting Riegraf 1985). Then, the Allemanic high and finally the Vindelician High  Yewtharaptor (talk) 22:15, 12 December 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks, happy to replace the Vindelician Land with the Black Forest Massif. However, the source (Vincent et al.) state that their Black Forest site is "about 200 km from Holzmaden", but it is in fact only 100 km when I measure on the map? Jens Lallensack (talk) 22:46, 12 December 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Correct, is a typo of the paper, the Riegraf profile with sand is 97 km from Holzmaden-Ohmden area. Yewtharaptor (talk) 00:33, 13 December 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Changed. Anything else? Note that I had removed the ammonite zone you added because its base does not seem to precisely match the base of the Unterer Schiefer. For the plesiosaur gastrolits, I think they are not strictly pertinent to this article, and I like to keep the text on-focus. Jens Lallensack (talk) 00:59, 13 December 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Needed Corrections