A fact from Xinjiangtitan appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know column on 16 November 2013 (check views). The text of the entry was as follows:
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Palaeontology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of palaeontology-related topics and create a standardized, informative, comprehensive and easy-to-use resource 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.PalaeontologyWikipedia:WikiProject PalaeontologyTemplate:WikiProject PalaeontologyPalaeontology
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
This article is within the scope of WikiProject China, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of China related articles 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.ChinaWikipedia:WikiProject ChinaTemplate:WikiProject ChinaChina-related
It's very commendable that images should be added to the articles, but the present one is anatomically very incorrect. Xinjiangtitan was not some over-sized brachiosaur. When a length of thirty metres was estimated, it was assumed half of this consisted of the tail. As it is shown now, the trunk and limbs are about an order of magnitude too large (i.e. in 3D). This can easily been seen by comparing it with the known length of some body parts: the entire dorsal series is 322 centimetres long and the thighbone 165 centimetres. The picture could be remodelled on the proportions of Mamenchisaurus.--MWAK (talk) 07:43, 16 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The uploader has ignored several requests to send images to the review page, so most of them have been removed, since they are never corrected. FunkMonk (talk) 15:18, 16 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
He corrected this one after I pointed out that the scale was too small and the head to large, but I forgot to mention the tail, so it's my bad... Rnnsh (talk) 16:59, 16 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
