Talk:Postosuchus

message: The Rauisuchidae page lists Postosuchus as one of the genuses belonging to that family, but here it says it belongs to the Poposauridae. Which is right? Jerkov 11:02, 29 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Traditionally Postosuchus was considered a rauisuchid, but Paul Sereno 2005 defines the Rauisuchidae as "The most inclusive clade containing Rauisuchus tiradentes Huene 1942 but not Aetosaurus ferratus Fraas 1877, Prestosuchus chiniquensis Huene 1942, Poposaurus gracilis Mehl 1915, or Crocodylus niloticus Laurenti 1768. --Firsfron 16:43, 29 May 2006 (UTC)

text: You may be right, but you're going to need to publish this before modifying the article. This is an encylcopedia, not the JVP.Dinoguy2 17:58, 26 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Rauisuchid or poposaurid? 

message: I remember in Walking with Dinos the Narrorator guy says Postosuchus was the largest carnivore on earth.  Give the "You-are-there" feeling of the program I assume he ment the Largest Carnivore of the Triassic.  Is this true?  Was Postosuchus the largest carnivore of the triassic?
In North America yes but there were larger carnivores than Postosuchus
Is Postosuchus a dinosaur? 96.229.179.106 (talk) 06:25, 20 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: No, but like a lot of big predatory "thecodonts", it was once thought to be a dinosaur. J. Spencer (talk) 14:56, 20 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Largest Triassic Carnivore?

message: "Postosuchus was one of the largest carnivorous reptiles during the late Triassic, reaching up to 4 meters (13 ft) in length and 2 meters (6.5 ft) in height"
That line doesn't make much sense, regarding height, this is a reptile, meaning the tail is close to half the total lenght and at 4-5m it certainly won't be 2m tall at anywhere, the source is incomplete though I could find it (Postosuchus, a new thecodontian reptile from the Triassic of Texas and the origin of tyrannosaurs) but I can't access it to verify such claim. Mike.BRZ (talk) 17:41, 22 June 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: So I've read the source, what is cited here appears in page 432 but some things are omited here, first, they're based on a very innacurate skeletal and life restoration by today standards (figures 19 and 20) and second, it says that is 2m at the head as standing, what does the text mean by standing? given how its only 1.5m tall at the head in the skeletal it's most likely that is 2m tall in tripod pose. I will remove that part of the text as height in tripod pose is an outdated measure. Mike.BRZ (talk) 21:51, 23 May 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: Ouch, it certainly wouldn't be able to hold it's head like that. FunkMonk (talk) 22:07, 23 May 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Height 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Postosuchus. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20061016211229/http://www.palaeos.com/Vertebrates/Units/270Archosauromorpha/270.700.html to http://www.palaeos.com/Vertebrates/Units/270Archosauromorpha/270.700.html
*Added  tag to http://www.dinosalive.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=19&Itemid=34
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 23:52, 6 January 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: The skulls we have images of either show a concave or convex upper profile. Is this due to updates to reconstructions, or differences between species? FunkMonk (talk) 15:18, 28 January 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Reconstructed skulls