K&M Mini Series

Honestly, you could call it whatever you want. In terms of shape it is more like Diadectes anyway.

While using Panini as a jumping point is useful for the sort-of generic figures, they were produced far later and wouldn't include the same animals.

As for conflating Camptosaurus with Parasaurolophus, given that they are kind of unrelated ornithopods (iguanodont vs hadrosaur) and one has a distinct crest, while the other has thumb spikes, I would not recommend it.

The assignment of the Pachycephalosaurus and Maiasaura would also be shaky, as those figures are pretty theropod-like. Which is what was tricky about them. Don't even get started on counting fingers and toes...

I'm also surprised that there aren't more of the sea creatures aren't pictured--I sent Beatrice a set of 8 when I sent here...a lot!

sbell wrote:

Honestly, you could call it whatever you want. In terms of shape it is more like Diadectes anyway.

While using Panini as a jumping point is useful for the sort-of generic figures, they were produced far later and wouldn't include the same animals.

As for conflating Camptosaurus with Parasaurolophus, given that they are kind of unrelated ornithopods (iguanodont vs hadrosaur) and one has a distinct crest, while the other has thumb spikes, I would not recommend it.

The assignment of the Pachycephalosaurus and Maiasaura would also be shaky, as those figures are pretty theropod-like. Which is what was tricky about them. Don't even get started on counting fingers and toes...

I'm also surprised that there aren't more of the sea creatures aren't pictured--I sent Beatrice a set of 8 when I sent here...a lot!

Beatrice will surely enter these figures on TAI later. She has an impressive contribution to te wiki and his collection is quite huge and she is taking new pictures of all her figures.
About your identifications, I am not questioning them. I trust more in you than in what these chubby figures intend to represent. The problem, is that often figures are marketed not exactly according with what is being represented and I've found it incredible how similar is this set when compared with Panini's. I am not talking about individual models but as a group of animals.
Conflating is my favorite personal sports, so don't get shocked if I call edmontonia to an edmontosaurus or brontotherium to a brontosaurus. This is not definitively my cup of tea and I am very thankful to you regarding this subject.
So, before your last post, I changed some of them but if you think these work better the other way, I rename it back.
Arsinotherium, now Coelodonta
Diadectes now cynognatus
Edmontonia now Polacanthus
Maiasaura now Iguanodon
Megatherium now Moropus
Mosasaurus now Tylosaurus
Saichania now Palaeoscincus

Roger wrote:

sbell wrote:

Honestly, you could call it whatever you want. In terms of shape it is more like Diadectes anyway.

While using Panini as a jumping point is useful for the sort-of generic figures, they were produced far later and wouldn't include the same animals.

As for conflating Camptosaurus with Parasaurolophus, given that they are kind of unrelated ornithopods (iguanodont vs hadrosaur) and one has a distinct crest, while the other has thumb spikes, I would not recommend it.

The assignment of the Pachycephalosaurus and Maiasaura would also be shaky, as those figures are pretty theropod-like. Which is what was tricky about them. Don't even get started on counting fingers and toes...

I'm also surprised that there aren't more of the sea creatures aren't pictured--I sent Beatrice a set of 8 when I sent here...a lot!

Beatrice will surely enter these figures on TAI later. She has an impressive contribution to te wiki and his collection is quite huge and she is taking new pictures of all her figures.
About your identifications, I am not questioning them. I trust more in you than in what these chubby figures intend to represent. The problem, is that often figures are marketed not exactly according with what is being represented and I've found it incredible how similar is this set when compared with Panini's. I am not talking about individual models but as a group of animals.
Conflating is my favorite personal sports, so don't get shocked if I call edmontonia to an edmontosaurus or brontotherium to a brontosaurus. This is not definitively my cup of tea and I am very thankful to you regarding this subject.
So, before your last post, I changed some of them but if you think these work better the other way, I rename it back.
Arsinotherium, now Coelodonta
Diadectes now cynognatus  
Edmontonia now Polacanthus
Maiasaura now Iguanodon
Megatherium now Moropus
Mosasaurus now Tylosaurus
Saichania now Palaeoscincus

I think those can work.

Still don't like the little blue one as a cynodont of any kind...still looks more like a diadectimorph that anything else. But, yes, they are pretty generic overall...!

Those tiny figures are cute!

SO great that this topic was brought forward again

They are so lovely