Talk:Jane (dinosaur)

Illinois Low‑importance

	Illinois portal This redirect is within the scope of WikiProject Illinois, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Illinois 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.IllinoisWikipedia:WikiProject IllinoisTemplate:WikiProject IllinoisWikiProject Illinois articles
Low	This redirect has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Dinosaurs

This redirect 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

DinoGuy settles Sue's length controversy

Dinoguy2: According to my metric converison widget, 13m = 42.65 ft, so that's settled.AaronCBurke 23:01, 8 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

How is age determined?

The article states that Jane was 11 years old at her death. How has this been determined? Reference, please. SpectrumDT 20:46, 6 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The Burpee Museum's Jane exhibit presents a videotape that details how Jane's age was determined. A local doctor used modern imaging and scanning equipment to scan her fossilized leg. Essentially, one counts the rings, and there were 11 rings. AaronCBurke 23:26, 11 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I had heard aging theropods from the leg was impossible due to hollow bones, and that modern techniques used the ribs. What gives? Dinoguy2 23:16, 8 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Did any of you watch the Discovery Channel this last December, just prior to Christmas? There was a HUGE documentary on Jane, which was really cool cause I used to work with one of the lead scientists (Scott Williams). Talks about her dieing from cancer and whatnot, might want to watch this and use it as a reference.--Kranar drogin 00:51, 9 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Razor-sharp?

I hear the term "razor-sharp" used to define the teeth of all kinds of creatures, from feral bush pigs still living today to Jane. Were the teeth actually "razor" sharp? Could you cut hairs with them, or is this hyperbole?

They're hardly razor sharp. In fact, tyrannosaur teeth were "fat", and D-shaped in cross section, designed for crushing, not for slicing and tearing as in many carnivorous dinosaurs. Dinoguy2 23:40, 7 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I know I'll need to find the reference for this statement, but during the excavations of some excellently preserved Tarbosaurus teeth in 1993, the serrations on those fat teeth were dangerously sharp, so although they wouldn't have sliced easily through their prey, they would still have caused superficial lacerations, which makes sense if you think about trying to force anything D-shaped in cross-section through bone. However, please disregard this until I find the reference... Mistyschism 22:11, 8 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Pics of Jane

I am going to be visiting her at the museum, so I am wondering what types of Pics do we need for the article expansion? Full body I assume, but anything else? Let me know by tomorrow.--Kranar drogin 03:14, 18 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Merge

I am removing the merge tag as the poster put nothing here about it and the article they suggested the merge to doesn't exist. IvoShandor 04:02, 30 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The merge-to article does not exist yet because it's just been proposed, to hold several separate articles on tyrannosaur specimens. The (Discuss) link should have taken you to the WikiProject Dinosaurs discussion on the topic. J. Spencer 04:14, 30 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

My bad, was half asleep. I awoke in the middle of the night and did that, I actually barely remember it. : )IvoShandor 10:38, 30 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

That's cool. No problem. J. Spencer 14:20, 30 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]