	Pterosaur size is part of WikiProject Amphibians and Reptiles, an effort to make Wikipedia a standardized, informative, comprehensive and easy-to-use resource for amphibians and reptiles. If you would like to participate, you can choose to edit this article, or visit the project page for more information.Amphibians and ReptilesWikipedia:WikiProject Amphibians and ReptilesTemplate:WikiProject Amphibians and Reptilesamphibian and reptile
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Palaeontology: Pterosaurs Mid‑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
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by the Pterosaurs task force (assessed as High-importance).

Contradiction?

In the first part of the article, it says that the smallest Pterosaur had a wingspan of 1ft (0.25m, which isn't exact, but whatever...) In the latter part, it says that some Pterosaurs were as small as a Sparrow. Now, I'm neither a dinosaur nor a sparrow expert, but one of these two facts has to be wrong. 24.70.188.179 (talk) 17:51, 20 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Suggested Rename

Considering that this page is meant as a list, perhaps calling it something along the lines of "List of Pterosaurs by size" would be better? Miyagawa (talk) 14:48, 15 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I believe we should expand the section on the reason why they became very large. Enlil Ninlil (talk) 11:55, 1 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Inaccuracies of Pteranodon and others

This list is inaccurate as Pteranodon is supposed to be the third largest. Evidence for this comes from numerous fossils of Pteranodon Ingens (now Pteranodon Longiceps)with wingspans of 6-8 metres. So it should really be fourth, with Geosternbergia at 6-7 metres in fifth. Along with the size inaccuracy Tropeognathus was only 6-7 metres long and didn't exceed 8 metres. Quetzalcoatlus was also larger than Hatzegopteryx since the latter was 10 metres, not 10-11 metres. I have also heard on several sites including wikipedia that Geosternbergia is a synonym of Pteranodon. So are they the same with different crests or different animals.

Everybody agrees that Geosternbergia sternbergi, Pteranodon longiceps, and probably Geosternbergia maysei are different animals. The disagreement is whether or not they belong to one genus (Pteranodon) or two or more genera (Pteranodon and Geosternbergia). A genus like Pteranodon is not an animal, it's a group of multiple species. Whether to "lump" them all together or "split" them into different groupings is a matter of opinion that can't be answered true or false by science. Dinoguy2 (talk) 15:30, 30 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

You're probably thinking of the large Sharon Springs fossils which have been referred to the species G. maysei but were previously (and sometimes still) included in P. longiceps. All recent sources on giant azhdarchids state that not enough is known about the difference in anatomy between Q. and H. to say that they are different sizes (see cite in article which is discussed here [1]), do you have a (recent) source for that claim? There is a new specimen referred to Tropeognathus with an estimated wingspan of 8m, as cited in the article. Please check the listed sources before changing the article based on out of date info. Dinoguy2 (talk) 15:20, 29 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Ornithocheirus

Ignore my crappy spelling but the list puts it at 12m wingspan, but behind several pterosaurs that are smaller (e.g Pteranodon) But according to its oqn page it didnt exceed 6m. So err, which article is wrong? Spinodontosaurus (talk) 16:44, 19 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Looks like somebody vandalized the page a few weeks ago, thanks for catching it! Dinoguy2 (talk) 23:09, 19 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Size

We've got Dinosaur size, we've got Pterosaur size, why don't we have Pliosaur size or Plesiosaur size? Dinosaur Fan (talk) 05:39, 15 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Dinosaur Fan: We shouldn't necessarily make lists for the sake of making lists, or stub articles when the parent article is still underdeveloped (see WP:PAGEDECIDE): there is already a good start at Plesiosauria#Size, and Pliosaur has plenty of room to expand before content is split, and it seems arbitrary to break up pliosaurs out of the larger group (should we also have Rhomaleosauridae size?) The more sub articles there are on a topic, however interesting they may be to create, the harder it is for the reader to navigate and fully explore a subject, and the harder it is for other editors to keep content consistent between articles and lists. Since you've already created Pliosaur size, I would motion for it to either be merged into Pliosaur or combined into a more 'natural' list of all Plesiosauria. --Animalparty-- (talk) 08:49, 15 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

This should be moved over to those ancient marine reptiles pages. 68.19.0.250 (talk) 00:17, 7 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Nemicolopterus versus No. 6 as the smallest pterosaur

The statement "The smallest known pterosaur is Nemicolopterus with a wingspan of about 250 mm (10 in)" is aguably incorrect.

From

https://pterosaurheresies.wordpress.com/2011/08/11/the-tiniest-pterosaur-no-6/

"Figure 2. Nemicolopterus has been described as the smallest pterosaur, but No. 6 in the Wellnhofer (1970) catalog was only half as tall."

"No. 6 is the single tiniest of all pterosaurs. It stands no taller than the shoulders of other tiny pterosaurs including several ready-to-fly embryos (Figure 2). No. 6 is about the size of the smallest bird, the bee hummingbird (Figure 2). Both are several times larger than the smallest living lizard, Sphaerodactylus ariasa (Hedges and Thomas 2001). If No. 6 is not an adult, we know from the examples of embryo pterosaurs, that it is a good copy of an adult. It’s sisters are only slightly larger than No. 6, so it unlikely to be a hatchling of an eight times larger taxon. Perhaps No. 6 would have become an adult upon reaching the size of the other tiny pterosaurs that were its sisters. No. 6 is smaller than the four pterosaur embryos now known (Figure 2)."

The website information goes on at some length.

https://pterosaurheresies.files.wordpress.com/2011/08/smallest-pterosaurs.jpg

https://pterosaurheresies.files.wordpress.com/2011/08/no6tosize-5881.jpg?w=795&h=359

I am not going to attempt to edit the page but I would suggest there should be a brief reference to "No. 6" along with a proviso that there are differences of opinion about whether it is an adult or embryo. Star A Star (talk) 05:59, 24 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

That web site is by noted pseudoscientist David Peters. None of the information should be considered reliable, and 100% of reliable published sources consider #6 a juvenile. [2] (By the way, Nemicolopterus is probably just a hatchling Sinopterus, though this research is still in press). Dinoguy2 (talk) 18:35, 24 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]