Top 10 extinct bird toys [Complete]

[stargatedalek]

The question is simple, what are your choices for top extinct avian dinosaurs?
my personal choices would be:
CollectA Deluxe Kelenken
Safari ltd. Wings of the World (IIRC that was the line?) Dodo (raphus)
Primeval Hesperornis
Primeval Dodo (raphus)


I know we had a thread for discussing the creation of top ten threads but I seem to have lost it, so I'm not going to open a poll here until I get the go ahead from the staff. In the meantime lets work on compiling a list.

[Gwangi]

This is a great idea for a poll/top ten video!

X-Plus Phorusrhacos
Kaiyodo Dinotales Titanis
Safari Gastornis/Diatryma
Bullyland Gastornis/Diatryma
Kaiyodo Dinotales Gastornis/Diatryma
Kaiyodo Dinotales Copepteryx
Schelich Gastornis/Diatryma

[Manatee]

Would Archaeopteryx be included? If so, we have Safari's, Bullyland's, Kaiyodo's, and maybe some that I missed.

[Gwangi]

Would Archaeopteryx be included? If so, we have Safari's, Bullyland's, Kaiyodo's, and maybe some that I missed.

Papo.

I was wondering about that myself, I would think it should qualify.

[sauroid]

Kaiyodo dino tales Diatryma/Gastornis
Kaiyodo dino tales Titanis
Bullyland Gastornis
MPC Diatryma
CollectA Kelenken
Kaiyodo dino tales Copepteryx
Bullyland Archaeopteryx
WS Archaeopteryx
Papo Archaeopteryx
Kaiyodo dino tales Archaeopteryx
Kabaya Archaeopteryx
Colorata Archaeopteryx

[triceratops83]

There's a small Japanese I think, Moa or Dinornis. Anyone know what brand?

OOH, and the Papo Dodo. A nice figure but it doesn't seem to exist anymore.

[DinoToyForum]

You say 'avian dinosaurs' but what's wrong with 'birds'? 

[stargatedalek]

Well if I said birds we couldn't include archeopteryx now could we

[Sim]

Archaeopteryx is a bird: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Archaeopteryx

[stargatedalek]

Wikipedia *sigh*, why must it fail to accept updates. A great number of their articles are highly dated and they refuse to update them.
http://www.nature.com/news/2011/110727/full/news.2011.443.html
http://phenomena.nationalgeographic.com/2013/07/31/archeopteryxs-evolutionary-humuliation-continues/
http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/notrocketscience/2011/07/27/earliest-bird-was-not-a-bird-new-fossil-muddles-the-archaeopteryx-story/#.VN6eFi7SuNc
http://www.livescience.com/24745-archaeopteryx.html

Worth noting that some of these are news sites as opposed to scientific journals, however this is only because I had difficulty finding accessible references.

[Dobber]

Curious, what is the difference between an Avian Dinosaur and a bird? Aren't non-avian dinosaurs the Coelurosaurs like the Maniraptors, Tyrannosauridae, and Ornithomimidae  and  birds evolved from the Maniraptors? This is not meant as a challenge to you but just a question that I want to understand. 

Chris

[stargatedalek]

An avian dinosaur is generally interpreted as a bird, but it isn't a scientific grouping rather a description, so subjectively flying dinosaurs that weren't birds could also be included. I feel species often "lumped in with" birds should also be included for simplicities sake.

[Quen]

An avian dinosaur is generally interpreted as a bird, but it isn't a scientific grouping rather a description, so subjectively flying dinosaurs that weren't birds could also be included. I feel species often "lumped in with" birds should also be included for simplicities sake.

Does this mean microraptor would qualify?

[stargatedalek]

Technically it shouldn't, but I guess it depends on whether people want it included.

[Quen]

I don't care either way. I was just curious.

[Sim]

Wikipedia *sigh*, why must it fail to accept updates. A great number of their articles are highly dated and they refuse to update them.
http://www.nature.com/news/2011/110727/full/news.2011.443.html
http://phenomena.nationalgeographic.com/2013/07/31/archeopteryxs-evolutionary-humuliation-continues/
http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/notrocketscience/2011/07/27/earliest-bird-was-not-a-bird-new-fossil-muddles-the-archaeopteryx-story/#.VN6eFi7SuNc
http://www.livescience.com/24745-archaeopteryx.html

Worth noting that some of these are news sites as opposed to scientific journals, however this is only because I had difficulty finding accessible references.

I find Wikipedia is often quite good at keeping updated.  With the studies that suggested Archaeopteryx isn't a bird and then the ones which disagreed with this, I very clearly remember the Archaeopteryx Wikipedia page reflecting the changing views.  There was a period where it said Archaeopteryx isn't a bird, but that didn't last long because the majority of following studies refuted this.

The study that led many people to think Archaeopteryx isn't a bird is the one referred to on the first, third and fourth pages you linked to.  It's from 2011 by Xu et al and since then it's been thoroughly refuted.  You can read about this study and the other studies that have dealt with Archaeopteryx's phylogenetic position, and why the scientific consensus is that it's a bird under "Phylogenetic position" on the Archaeopteryx Wikipedia page, it includes references too: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Archaeopteryx#Phylogenetic_position  It's worth noting that the study by Xu et al classified Archaeopteryx as a member of Deinonychosauria - a group that more recent studies are consistently finding to probably be a junior synonym of Dromaeosauridae.  You can read about this under "Classification" here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paraves  It has references too!

The article on the second page you linked to doesn't imply Archaeopteryx isn't a bird.

An avian dinosaur is generally interpreted as a bird, but it isn't a scientific grouping rather a description, so subjectively flying dinosaurs that weren't birds could also be included. I feel species often "lumped in with" birds should also be included for simplicities sake.

I read about this here, under "Definition": http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bird#Definition  I get the feeling it's being made complicated than is necessary...

Comparing the skeletons of some birds (Archaeopteryx, Ichthyornis), Anchiornis, some dromaeosaurids (Xiaotingia, Microraptor and Sinornithosaurus) and some troodontids (Jinfengopteryx, Troodon) and combining that with what studies about them have shown makes me agree with the consensus on their classifications.

[DinoToyForum]

Well if I said birds we couldn't include archeopteryx now could we

You could because Archaeopteryx is the first bird. 

[stargatedalek]

Well then it seems I was incorrect, thanks for explaining it in more depth for me! I was using the fourth definition of aves/birds, which would have excluded archeopteryx. This was also why I specified avian dinosaurs rather than birds, which I figured would have broadened it to the second definition given.

[Dinoguy2]

Well if I said birds we couldn't include archeopteryx now could we

You could because Archaeopteryx is the first bird. 

Actually, a majority of studies currently find Aurornis to be a bird, and it's older than Archaeopteryx, so Archaeopteryx is not the first bird anymore--Aurornis is.

[DinoToyForum]

Well if I said birds we couldn't include archeopteryx now could we

You could because Archaeopteryx is the first bird. 

Actually, a majority of studies currently find Aurornis to be a bird, and it's older than Archaeopteryx, so Archaeopteryx is not the first bird anymore--Aurornis is.

Alright

So, now it is time to settle on the poll options...does anyone have any suggestions that haven't already been raised?