Tags/Categories on Dinosaur Toy Blog

[DinoToyForum]

I see that there are period tags now! 

Just scrolled through 5 pages of Permian reviews (mostly Dimetrodon, of course). Cretaceous has 84, Jurassic has 32, Triassic has 5. 

Ha, well spotted! I just finished allocating all the reviews to the new categories.

I've also added the Age filter to the sidebar, that gives the full tallies. I knew Cretaceous would have the most reviews but I'm surprised just how far ahead it is! 1,262 Cretaceous reviews, compared to 481 Jurassic!

I am also surprised by the gap between Jurassic and Cretaceous. I blame T. rex for a lot of that.

Yeah, taking out T. rex reviews (222) shrinks the gap considerably.

[Halichoeres]

Thanks for adding those! Ignoring that some reviews have multiple age tags, there's 1262 from the Cretaceous and 1688 for everything else (about 43% Cretaceous). That imbalance is much smaller than I expected, and smaller than the imbalance among entries on dinotoycollector.com (about 60% Cretaceous). I wonder if there's just a lot of JP/JW stuff driving up the count of Tyrannosaurus/Velociraptor/Triceratops on DTC that we haven't bothered to review on the DTB. Anyway, thanks again!

[DinoToyForum]

Thanks for adding those! Ignoring that some reviews have multiple age tags, there's 1262 from the Cretaceous and 1688 for everything else (about 43% Cretaceous). That imbalance is much smaller than I expected, and smaller than the imbalance among entries on dinotoycollector.com (about 60% Cretaceous). I wonder if there's just a lot of JP/JW stuff driving up the count of Tyrannosaurus/Velociraptor/Triceratops on DTC that we haven't bothered to review on the DTB. Anyway, thanks again!

I count only 1041 for everything else (54% Cretaceous), which is closer. Am I miscalculating? Remember, announcement posts don't count, maybe that explains the discrepancy?

[Halichoeres]

Oh, you're completely right, I just goofed up the arithmetic somehow. So an outright majority for the Cretaceous. Unless I have managed to mess up yet again, that means about 16 reviews for every million years of the Cretaceous, and about 2 reviews for every million years of the rest of the history of multicellular animals.

Among the remainder, the Pleistocene is definitely punching above its weight, although mostly on the strength of mammoths and sabertooths.

[DinoToyForum]

Oh, you're completely right, I just goofed up the arithmetic somehow. So an outright majority for the Cretaceous. Unless I have managed to mess up yet again, that means about 16 reviews for every million years of the Cretaceous, and about 2 reviews for every million years of the rest of the history of multicellular animals.

Among the remainder, the Pleistocene is definitely punching above its weight, although mostly on the strength of mammoths and sabertooths.

There's probably the makings of some sort of paleo-pop-culture-bias research paper in all this.

[suspsy]

I just posted the first TNG review to the blog. Shall we add a TNG category or should we hold off until more toys are reviewed?

[DinoToyForum]

I just posted the first TNG review to the blog. Shall we add a TNG category or should we hold off until more toys are reviewed?

Done

[Halichoeres]

Oh, you're completely right, I just goofed up the arithmetic somehow. So an outright majority for the Cretaceous. Unless I have managed to mess up yet again, that means about 16 reviews for every million years of the Cretaceous, and about 2 reviews for every million years of the rest of the history of multicellular animals.

Among the remainder, the Pleistocene is definitely punching above its weight, although mostly on the strength of mammoths and sabertooths.

There's probably the makings of some sort of paleo-pop-culture-bias research paper in all this.

Don't tempt me!

[DinoToyForum]

I've added the new Type '3D print' and the new Brand 'Mike Eischen'. I know Mike Eischen isn't technically a brand name but it makes sense to add it now there's more than one review of one of his sculpts.