Talk:Rodhocetus

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Cetaceans, a project which is currently considered to be inactive.CetaceansWikipedia:WikiProject CetaceansTemplate:WikiProject CetaceansCetaceans articles

Mammals Low‑importance

	Mammals portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Mammals, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of mammal-related subjects 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.MammalsWikipedia:WikiProject MammalsTemplate:WikiProject Mammalsmammal articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Palaeontology Low‑importance

	Paleontology portal 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 articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Picture[edit]

I have a picture of a Rhodocetus skull (different species that was discovered earlier) that I made myself and would like to upload and add to a general Rhodocetus article. Also given the error in the title (specific epithets should always be lowercase), wouldn't it be better to make an article on the whole genus Rhodocetus and move this section thereto? Fedor 15:16, 28 Mar 2004 (UTC)

Hey! What happened to my image!? Fedor 06:17, 18 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Spelling[edit]

Is the correct spelling Rodhocetus or Rhodocetus? It is spelled both ways in the article! Lusanaherandraton 10:37, 20 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Confusing Sentence[edit]

The sentence "This trait is only known in artiodactyls, as all other mammalian orders have a single-spooled a monkeylike species very whale-like, though the swimming style is very different." is confusing and should be clarified.

74.162.157.112 (talk) 17:55, 6 June 2009 (UTC) Mike Sarles[reply]

Hans Thewissen Bio[edit]

I am writing a bio. I know him. Give me til Dec 31 2018 --Akrasia25 (talk) 13:24, 3 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Much appreciated.--Mr Fink (talk) 13:29, 3 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Find image of a skeletal reconstruction[edit]

This 2-minute video interview with Dr. Gingerich youtube.com/watch?v=POMjpTSk3no shows I think the importance of displaying an image (in addition to the couple images currently displayed) of Rodhocetus' skeleton (showing just those bones actually found). I've searched and haven't found one so hopefully, some editor can locate just such a usable image. Bob Enyart, Denver KGOV radio host (talk) 20:31, 2 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

More images are of course always good, it is just hard to get some with the right licencing (so someone here might have to make such a diagram). As for that video, the anti-evolution conclusion drawn from the fact that a scientist revises a reconstruction because more fossils are later found is ridiculous. We once thought Tyrannosaurus had three fingers because the hands weren't known (based on the fact that other large meat-eating dinosaurs known at the time had three fingers). When the hands were found, we revised this idea. Does that disprove evolution? You tell me... FunkMonk (talk) 20:38, 2 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]