What wiki article is that?

Original definition
The taxon Dinosauria was formally named in 1842 by English palaeontologist Richard Owen, who used it to refer to the "distinct tribe or sub-order of Saurian Reptiles" that were then being recognized in England and around the world.[1] The term is derived from the Greek words δεινός (deinos meaning "terrible", "fearsome", or "formidable") and σαύρα (saura meaning "lizard" or "reptile"). Though the taxonomic name has often been interpreted as a reference to dinosaurs' teeth, claws, and other fearsome characteristics, Owen intended it merely to evoke their size and majesty.[2]

Modern definition

Triceratops skeleton at the American Museum of Natural History in New York City.Under phylogenetic taxonomy, dinosaurs are usually defined as all descendants of the most recent common ancestor of Triceratops and modern birds.[3] It has also been suggested that Dinosauria be defined as all of the descendants of the most recent common ancestor of Megalosaurus and Iguanodon, because these were two of the three genera cited by Richard Owen when he recognized the Dinosauria.[4] Both definitions result in the same set of animals being defined as dinosaurs, including theropods (mostly bipedal carnivores), sauropodomorphs (mostly large herbivorous quadrupeds with long necks and tails), ankylosaurians (armored herbivorous quadrupeds), stegosaurians (plated herbivorous quadrupeds), ceratopsians (herbivorous quadrupeds with horns and frills), and ornithopods (bipedal or quadrupedal herbivores including "duck-bills"). These definitions are written to correspond with scientific conceptions of dinosaurs that predate the modern use of phylogenetics. The continuity of meaning is intended to prevent confusion about what the term "dinosaur" means.

From what I read there in that link, it seems that there are two definitions of what is a dinosaur:

Did you notice the date of the original definition? The date of the original definition of dinosaur was 1842, therefore, it would make sense to me that EGW in her writings had this definition in mind.

In the paragraph about size in the wiki article, we read that: "A rough estimate for average dinosaur weight is about 100 kilograms (200 lb)." That is not very different from the average adult human weight.

The curse does not say that plants which previously did not have thorns now would have such. The curse says that thorny plants and thistles would grow in wheat fields. Adam will farm the ground and wish for cereals and vegetables but "all" he will see is the thorns and thistles. If we see this to mean that God created thorns and thistles to plauge Adam, I think we are reading more into the text than is there.

I've never heard of throny plants and thistles growing in wheat fields. Besides, Ellen White is clear that it was not God who created them.

If God did not create a whole family of plants that anyone can see does exist, then it is no longer true that "All things came into being through Him, and apart from Him nothing came into being that has come into being."

Christ never planted the seeds of death in the system. Satan planted these seeds when he tempted Adam to eat of the tree of knowledge which meant disobedience to God. Not one noxious plant was placed in the Lord's great garden, but after Adam and Eve sinned, poisonous herbs sprang up. In the parable of the sower the question was asked the master, "Didst not thou sow good seed in thy field? from whence then hath it tares?" The master answered, "An enemy hath done this" (Matthew 13:27, 28). All tares are sown by the evil one. Every noxious herb is of his sowing, and by his ingenious methods of amalgamation he has corrupted the earth with tares. (2SM 288)