Board Thread:Manual of Style/@comment-1187034-20160313015343

Lately on the wiki I've been seeing lots of discussions about how big the dinosaurs in the Jurassic Park films were, especially in dinosaur vs dinosaur debates. There's been a problem answering this question as the dinosaurs on film vary in size depending on the scene and the official supplementary material has proven not to be the greatest of sources with either each source having contradicting the other or giving the estimates being too low or too high (such as JurassicWorld.com giving the size of the Mosasaurus as being 18 meters long when it is clearly larger in the film). I've even come to distrust the JPIII size chart even which many fans use in the Spino vs rex debate due to the sizes given for T. rex and Spinosaurus on the chart being about the same size as their animatronics that lack tails. Plus, they give the size of Stegosaurus as being 40 ft long when in the book The Making of The Lost World: Jurassic Park John Rosengrant said the adult Stegosaur animatronic used in TLW was "almost twenty-six feet in length".

BastionMonk, one of our bureaucrats here, has come with an interesting solution to this dilemma by creating a size table containing a dinosaur's given size in supplementary material. So what I'm asking here is should we implement this into our articles?' I think it is a great idea as it since as I've mentioned before size charts contradict each other (like how the animatronic of Rexy for Jurassic Park was 40 ft long and 20 ft tall [source] while more recent size charts say she's only 16 ft tall or that's she's 16'10 ft tall and 44 ft long) plus it could prevent bias towards a certain size chart.

I believe this should only apply to film canon material and select video games. I don't think the novel canon should be accounted for since the novels seemed to be more consistent with dinosaur size than the film canon.

So should we implement this or not? 