Board Thread:Manual of Style/@comment-1187034-20151130020127/@comment-25238001-20151130215731

Edaphosaurus wrote: BastionMonk wrote: I really object against this. We should not make up names and stories to explain what an animal looks like in the films.

I think we should live by this rule: We know something or we don't.

The raptors that appear in the films. We should just refer to them as "the Velociraptors from JPIII" or "the Jurassic World Velociraptors". Because that is all we know.

Sure, JPLegacy is keen to make up entire theories about the dinos. I remeber reading there that the JPIII raptors, sornalis, were the original raptors and that Wu modfied them into the nublaris breed, JP and TLW raptors, to fit more in a theme park. Nice idea, but you REALLY should not present fan theories like that as a fact. Because it is made up. Appears nowhere in official JP media.

We had a long argument back then about how to call the raptors in JP based on which species it looks like most. However, it is a debate with no end; and it is completely unnecessary. We are a wiki about a franchise, not wikipedia. If the films refer to them as just "Velociraptors"; we should do just that. Sure, raptors look different in each film, it spares us a lot of debate and time if we just refer to them as "JPIII raptors" or "JW raptors".

Sure, we can put into the articles a section that informs the reader that they are not scientifically accurate and how this image of raptors came to pass. I agree. This is a place to document facts, not create wild speculation. The Jurassic Park movies aren't fact. The animals themselves are not representations of real creatures, a fact that I often notice you bemoaning. This wiki is here to document Jurassic Park media, and that's why there are no non-JP images on here.

What you call "wild speculation" is what this forum is here for. People can have fun discussing the past, present, ad future of the JP films.