Board Thread:Questions and Answers/@comment-24063199-20131022210137/@comment-24139191-20131106224851

Just felt like pointing out that ichthyosaurs were reptiles, in case you were implying that they evolved directly from fish, which they didn't, Pike. Also, I see no reason for Plesioth and other piscines to be placed in the group ichthyosauria. Plesioth may have some features in common with fish, but that doesn't make them fish like; and simply being fishlike does not mean that they can be placed into the group ichthyosauria. Ichthyosaurs were really only fish like in shape as far as appearances go.

There are way too many physiological differences for plesioth to be considered an ichthyosaur. Plesioth has rayed fins, large overlapping fish-like scales, huge difference in bone configuration throughout the body, and limbs highly adapted for amphibious behavior.

I do agree that delex has a lot more in common with most ichthyosaurs, but that only goes so far in shape. Delex still has its own major differences. Rayed fins, a large vertebral spike, and its head is more crocodilian with eyes placed on top of the skull rather than being held in sockets, recurved mandibles, and nostrils at the tip of the snout.

To be honest, I'm not sure why the wiki would even bother with taxonomy considering how unusual most of the monsters are. As far as taxonomy goes, we can't go any further than "class" with most of the monsters. The information put in the taxonomy on the ecology pages skips kingdom and class and then the rest is entirely made up stuff based off nothing. What the heck is “Totos” anyways?

All I’m saying is, why include taxonomy if there isn’t enough information given to even make a hypothesis?