Geology Stub‑class

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Geology, an attempt at creating a standardized, informative, comprehensive and easy-to-use geology resource. If you would like to participate, you can choose to edit this article, or visit the project page for more information.GeologyWikipedia:WikiProject GeologyTemplate:WikiProject GeologyGeology Stub This article has been rated as Stub-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. ??? This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale. This article has been automatically rated by a bot or other tool as Stub-class because it uses a stub template. Please ensure the assessment is correct before removing the |auto= parameter.

Dinosaurs Unassessed

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 has not yet received a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. ??? This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Why isn't Labocania in the family Tyrannosauridae? It's got the same body structure and it lived at the time of most other Tyrannosaurids. Benosaurus 16:55, 22 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Basically, because it's more primitive. Tyrannosauridae is defined as the most restrictive group containing Tyannosaurus, Albertasaurus, and Gorgosaurus. Anything more primitive than the common ancestor of those three is excluded, and goes into the broader superfamily Tyrannosauroidea. Dinoguy2 22:01, 22 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Although it has a few tyrannosaurid-like characters, the referral of Labocania to the Tyrannosauroidea is questionable. It might be a tyrannosauroid, but better material is required to confirm this (Kakuru, 13 February, 2008).