Talk:Wahweap Formation

Paleobiota help

Code

This section contains pre-made code that can be copy and pasted into articles containing paleobiota tables. To save space, not all of the code is visible, additional code can be found by simply viewing this section's edit page.

Premade rowspans:

| rowspan="2" |

| rowspan="3" |

| rowspan="4" |

| rowspan="5" |

| rowspan="6" |

| rowspan="7" |

Replacement headings for "Presence" column

! Location
! Stratigraphic position
! Material

Replacement headings for "Taxa" column

Cell background colors

The background colors of the cells are a means to communicate the relevant organism's taxonomic status.

Color key Taxon Reclassified taxon Taxon falsely reported as present Dubious taxon or junior synonym Ichnotaxon Ootaxon Morphotaxon		Notes Uncertain or tentative taxa are in small text; crossed out taxa are discredited.

Red for reclassified and preoccupied

|style="background:#fbdddb;" |

Purple for taxa falsely reported as present:

|style="background:#f3e9f3;" |

Dark grey for discredited taxa:

|style="background:#E6E6E6;" |

Peach for Ichnotaxa:

|style="background:#FEF6E4;" |

Light blue for Ootaxa:

|style="background:#E3F5FF;" |

Light green for Morphotaxa:

|style="background:#D1FFCF;" |

Acristavus

Is Acristavus one of the "at least two different types of hadrosaur" mentioned?

Dgrootmyers (talk) 01:28, 13 July 2011 (UTC)

Probably. Can't know for sure, though. Abyssal (talk) 03:47, 13 July 2011 (UTC)

As far as I know there there is only one Hadrosaur known from Wahweap, thought if there are references that prove otherwise I would like to see. Future discoveries will probably change this however.142.176.114.76 (talk) 22:30, 23 March 2014 (UTC)

Palaeobiota

There should be "boxes" (Tables?) for the non-dinosaur taxa as well. The invertebrates section even mentions the likely presence of at least four identified genera.142.176.114.76 (talk) 22:27, 23 March 2014 (UTC)

Machairoceratops Error?

From the section "Age" on this page: "The lower member of the Wahweap would date from ~81-80.7 Ma,...Further, The capping sandstone is closer to the Kaiparowits Formation in deposition and there would have been a gap between the upper and capping sandstone members of the Wahweap Formation. The capping sandstone would then date ~77-76.7 Ma, based on a 77 Ma date from the base of the sandstone."

The section "Dinosaurs" on this page states Machairoceratops is from the Upper Wahweap Formation - but the citation given for this formation is titled "A New Centrosaurine Ceratopsid, Machairoceratops cronusi gen et sp. nov., from the Upper Sand Member of the Wahweap Formation (Middle Campanian), Southern Utah". This is referring to the capping sandstone member of the Wahweap Formation. This is distinct from just the "upper" Wahweap Formation, with an age range of ~77-76.7 Ma.

Meanwhile, the page Machairoceratops gives a geologic age of 80.8 ma in the infobox, which would belong to the Lower Wahweap Formation.

If there's no objection, I'll going to go ahead and change the age in the Machairoceratops infobox to ~77-76.7 Ma, and the Machairoceratops age description in the "Dinosaurs" section to "Uppermost (capping sandstone member, ~77-76.7 Ma)". --Dino Soros (talk) 08:37, 31 January 2022 (UTC)

@Dino Soros:I don't see anywhere in the cited article where Machairoceratops is mentioned to be from the capping sandstone. Instead, the article says it is from the upper sand member, which is older than 77 Ma. Therefore, it is better to change the infobox of the page Machairoceratops to match the age of the upper member rather than the capping sandstone. Meekororum (talk) 12:17, 31 January 2022 (UTC)