Talk:Gorgosaurus

message: at Paleobiology at Life History there is a small error and probably it was meant to be said that gorgosaurus grew 50 kilograms (110 pounds) a year. Felix Petrar (talk) 05:23, 11 March 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Yeah, good catch that. Casliber (talk · contribs) 06:35, 11 March 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  110 kilograms= 50 pounds ?

message: What a fascinating, well-written and well-referenced article!
I've got one initial comment before I look at the article in detail though; the first external link (to the Smithsonian) appears to be broken.
--Malleus Fatuarum 23:44, 14 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Link replaced. I look forward to further observations, Malleus. Firsfron of Ronchester 00:10, 15 November 2007 (UTC)

text: Thanks for the review, Malleus; I'm glad to get a review from someone who is "no great dinosaur expert"; we've already got experts. What we needed was someone unfamiliar with the material to make sure the article was clear to the casual reader. Cas Liber wrote most of this article back in July, and I thought it was good enough to reach GA status; I'm glad you agree. I will work on fixing the problems you pointed out. 
# I'll try to work out the weight thing.
# A link to orbit might help! ;)
# Thanks for the suggestion about Dale Russell's title. Good point.
# Maybe I can reword this...
# The copyedits look great; I was observing as you were making them.
If you have further suggestions on reflection, Malleus, please do not hesitate to make them. Your ideas and comments can only improve this article. Thanks again for your time. Firsfron of Ronchester 01:58, 15 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  GA review 

message: *I remember someone saying that the statue in New Mexico on the right image was supposed to be depict an Albertosaurus specimen found there, which later turned out to be a Gorgosaurus, or what? Could the image be included in the article then? FunkMonk (talk) 04:52, 2 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, it's labeled as Albertasaurus by the Museum. Whether or not this is incorrect would depend on which specimen(s) the sculptor based it on. The sculptor is David Arthur Thomas. Maybe somebody could email him? If it is a specimen now assigned to Gorgosaurus, maybe somebody at the museum should be notified, though I doubt changing the label would be a high priority... Dinoguy2 (talk) 01:45, 23 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Ah, I thought it had been "officially" resolved, no big deal then. FunkMonk (talk) 06:53, 23 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I suppose the Gorgosaurus/Albertosaurus controversey ought to be explored more. For  a decade or more Gorgosaurus was not recognised as a separate genus by most of the palaeontological community.Gazzster (talk) 00:35, 11 February 2011 (UTC)

text: Yeah, this one is much easier to see. MMartyniuk (talk) 16:49, 25 August 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Gorgosaurus or Albertosaurus? 

message: "In 2001, paleontologist Phil Currie reported skin impressions from the holotype specimen of G. libratus. The skin of Gorgosaurus was smooth, lacking the scales found in many other dinosaurs".  I have a children's dinosaur book from 1980, The Mysterious World of Dinosaurs, that contains a picture of Gorgosaurus with smooth, glossy black skin.  Was this just a lucky guess on the part of the illustrator, or had skin impressions been found earlier than is stated here? Wardog (talk) 09:53, 11 August 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Could be either. The smooth skin impressions were actually found on the holotype--Currie just was the first to really point them out formally in 2001, but the specimen was discovered much earlier. Note that other gorgo specimens show scales on other parts of the body, so it must have had areas of scales and areas of naked skin (which might have supported feathers in life). MMartyniuk (talk) 12:24, 11 August 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: if so, where are the anchor-points for these feathers on the 'smooth' skin?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 104.169.37.99 (talk) 15:42, 16 November 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Smooth skin 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Gorgosaurus. 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/20080130171049/http://www.childrensmuseum.org/themuseum/dinosphere/profiles/gorgo.html to http://www.childrensmuseum.org/themuseum/dinosphere/profiles/gorgo.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080227134632/http://www.mnhn.ul.pt/geologia/gaia/12.pdf to http://www.mnhn.ul.pt/geologia/gaia/12.pdf
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) 09:54, 23 March 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: It seems to me, the picture's feathered rendering contradicts the text : 
"In 2001, paleontologist Phil Currie reported skin impressions from the holotype specimen of G. libratus. He originally reported the skin as being essentially smooth and lacking the scales found in other dinosaurs, similar to the secondarily featherless skin found in large modern birds.[8] Scales of some sort were present in this specimen, but they are reportedly widely dispersed from each other and very small. Other patches of isolated Gorgosaurus skin shows denser, and larger though still relatively fine scales (smaller than hadrosaurid scales and approximately as fine as a Gila monster's).[9] Neither of these specimens was associated with any particular bone or specific body area.[9] In the Encyclopedia of Dinosaurs Kenneth Carpenter pointed out that traces of skin impressions from the tail of Gorgosaurus showed similar small rounded or hexagonal scales.[10]"
216.221.57.72 (talk) 23:29, 23 July 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: Feathers and scales are not mutually exclusive. They can be present at different parts of the body of the same animal, as is shown in the restorations here. Some dinosaur fossils are also known that show such a combination, feathers alongside scales. Some formations are not good at preserving both, though, so absence of either isn't proof of anything. That said, the first restoratio here may be slightly too fluffy. FunkMonk (talk) 06:37, 27 July 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Feathers or not 

message: Haven't they established that these creatures ranged far north of the border of the inland sea?  The literature points to Daspletosaurus being a heavier animal than Gorgo, with a much stronger skull ... the article should be adjusted.104.169.37.99 (talk) 15:46, 16 November 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: You may be thinking of Nanuqsaurus, which was assumed to be Gorgosaurus early on. FunkMonk (talk) 17:42, 16 November 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  polar region? weight compared to Daspleto?