Talk:Oviraptor

Dinosaurs Mid‑importance

	Dinosaurs portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Dinosaurs, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of dinosaurs and dinosaur-related topics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.DinosaursWikipedia:WikiProject DinosaursTemplate:WikiProject Dinosaursdinosaurs articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Image

I'm removing the image uploaded by Dudo for the following reasons:

Say what you will about feathered dromaeosaurids, but oviraptorids WERE feathered. Skeletal adaptations such as pygostyles serve as direct evidence of this, as do the brooding position of the nesting specimens, which could not possibly have covered thir nests without wings. Furthermore, many scientists (including Benton, whose taxonom we're using with the exception of this particular issue) consider oviraptors to be birds, not dinosaurs.
The image depicts a specimen famously thought of as Oviraptor, but which has been renamed Citipati. If anything, it belongs on the page wfor the correct genus.Dinoguy2 18:31, 23 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with the removal, I should check it before, sorry. --Dudo2 11:40, 24 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Egg image

The image of a clutch of eggs recently added is a bit suspicious to me, since I know a lot of supposed eggs get labeled as Oviraptor, when in fact they're Citipati or not identifiable beyond family level. Can anyone confirm that these eggs have been attributed to O. philoceratops in a published source? Dinoguy2 (talk) 05:14, 7 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

From Portal talk:Dinosaurs

I'm copying this from Portal talk:Dinosaurs, since I expect more people will see it here:

Oviraptor Question: Oviraptor page contains a photo with a nest of eggs, and suggests that Oviraptor laid and tended larger nests. Seems that since 2005 Oviraptor is thought to have laid eggs in two's. I only find this important in that it suggests they reproduced more like birds than reptiles. I read about it here: http://animals.howstuffworks.com/dinosaurs/inside-dinosaur-egg.htm/printable Look for "Unlaid Egg". I'm sure there are much better sources for this, but that's what I've got. Thanks! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.53.222.219 (talk) 02:10, 5 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Copied over by J. Spencer (talk) 03:51, 5 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, they laid eggs two at a time, but the final nests were demonstrably much larger. Both Oviraptor and Citipati have known nests of a dozen eggs or more. Whether this means they nested communally, or produced several sets of two eggs in rapid succession, I don't know. Also, the article you linked is probably being over-specific, as many are, using Oviraptor as a synonym for "oviraptorid". Only one specimen of Oviraptor has been described. I'd have to look up what species the unlaid egg specimen actually belongs to, if it's even been described yet. Dinoguy2 (talk) 17:48, 5 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Sure enough, the paper is Sato et al. 2005. They don't refer this specimen to any species, only referring to it as "oviraptorosaurian." I really with people would stop saying stuff like this to the press, making it look like Oviraptor is far more well known than it is. Dinoguy2 (talk) 17:57, 5 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Restored skeleton

Is this image appropriate? It does not appear to be based on Citipati. FunkMonk (talk) 16:23, 31 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Huh. The crest shape looks vaguely like some recons of O. philoceratops but the fenestrae are all wrong, so it can't be that. The hands are also way too stubby and look more ingeniine. No clue what it actually is other than a hodgepodge generic oviraptorid, possibly an ingeniine body, with a totally made up skull. Could be wrong though, maybe one for DinoData (See here for ovi comparison: [1]) MMartyniuk (talk) 23:56, 31 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Egg-eater

Do we have any proof that Oviraptor didn't eat eggs. Just because it brooded its own eggs doesn't mean it wouldn't have eaten the eggs of other dinosaur species, and its beak sure does look useful for cracking tough egg-shells. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.36.153.240 (talk) 02:34, 5 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

It may have eaten eggs. But I think the beak is overkill and not really an egg-eating specialization. Egg shells are not very tough to break. Mollusk shells, maybe. MMartyniuk (talk) 05:28, 5 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This may be of interest to those who edit this page

This article suggests the Oviraptor had feathered tails that were used in mating displays. --Ghostexorcist (talk) 18:25, 5 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This is certainly plausible and perhaps even probable, given the number of modern ground-nesting birds such as pheasants and peacocks that display their tail feathers during mating rituals, and the fact that fossils of the related oviraptorid Caudipteryx show a similar tail fan. But since for the time being we have no direct fossil evidence of this feature in Oviraptor itself, it may be a bit too speculative for this article. --24.36.130.109 (talk) 17:41, 27 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

Oviraptor holotype.jpg

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 17:03, 13 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

Oviraptor holotype.jpg

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 04:13, 11 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]