Though I'm a great admirer of the qroqqadon I don't think the same way. I like dino-fuzz precisely because it's ad-hoc. It's a tentative attempt at defining a new contempt. For me, it's watching language evolution in action that brings much satisfaction. Dino-fuzz strikes me as odd but nonetheless plausible so I'm happy to mark its arrival. Perhaps its stay will be short, who can tell.
Well, it's a major news story, and any educated person would be looking at it: from a linguistic point of view it has all these hooks too. I thought the other two words were possibilities, and contemplated noding under both of them, but they both seemed a bit ad-hoc. The genus name Tianyulong I eventually plumped for is permanent, but genus names aren't really English words.
"A discovery in China has prompted researchers to question the scaly image of dinosaurs. Previously, experts thought the first feathered dinosaurs appeared about 150 million years ago, but the find suggests feathers evolved much earlier. This has raised the question of whether many more of the creatures may have been covered with similar bristles, or dino-fuzz." - Victoria Gill, Fossil hints at fuzzy dinosaurs, BBC website, 18 March 2009.