Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Old talk[edit]

Sorry, italicizing the name Alamosaurus (and all other generic names like Parasaurolophus or Nodocephalosaurus) is not optional. It is not a formatting decision, it is correct scientific information. This is a scientific encyclopedia entry and should reflect correct science. Genus and species are always italicized. Even in an encyclopedia. Especially in an encyclopedia.

I have also repaired the citation for the article in The Dinosauria to provide correct information. Each chapter of this book is written as a separate paper, with separate authors. This chapter, and others, has been cited as such in many professional papers and should be here as well.

Formatting into sections is my preference, but I am not the only one reading this article so I will not reformat the subheadings as I originally wrote them. However, I will not let incorrect information remain in the article, and I would hope nobody else would either.

Sheep81 04:13, 27 February 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]


Titanosauridae, as a family-level taxon, has priority over Saltasauridae. Other families named after nomen dubia have not been abandoned, why single out this one? Also, see talk page of Titanosaur.Dinoguy2 01:31, 2 May 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]

It doesn't matter if they have or have not been abandoned. Common consensus among scientists (at least among American and European ones) is to no longer use Titanosauridae. This is an encyclopedia, we don't decide whether things are consistent or not. Sheep81 02:10, 2 May 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]


  • Height- 40 feet (from foot to head)[2]
  • Length- 120 feet (35-37 m) (from head to tail)[2]
  • Weight- 100 tons (metric)[2]

Isn't that a bit reall wrong? He's not longer as 20 metres and weight not more as 15 tons. --JaroV (talk) 11:17, 5 January 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Alamosaurus is not a Saltasaurid[edit]

I thought it was generally believed that Alamosaurus was not a Saltasaurid but a member of the Nemegtosaurid family (at least the Nemegtosaurids have a Lurasian origin). — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 07:27, 2 May 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

A quick note; Alamosaurus is not named for the Alamo mission.[edit]

I know we have a paragraph about it in the article already, but for those who patrol talk pages; Alamosaurus is not named after Fort Alamo in Texas. Any edits claiming it is are to be reverted on sight. Alamosaurus was named for the Ojo Alamo Formation, not Fort Alamo, despite what our own DYK says. Dromaeosaurus is best dinosaur (talk) 14:13, 13 December 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Overly detailed taxobox[edit]

The taxobox of this article lists every major subclade of sauropods Alamosaurus belongs to (Sauropoda, Eusauropoda, Neosauropoda, Macronaria, Titanosauria, Lithostrotia, Saltasauridae, Opisthocoelicaudiinae) which I feel is too long for the article. I've tried to remedy it by removing the display_parents parameter and setting it to 1 (from 3), but nothing changed. How can we shorten it? (talk) 01:45, 7 March 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]