If so, would it be a synonym of any already known genera or a new underscribed species? Also, what do you base this on, if Dakotaraptor was chimeric, then what other evidence of a Hell Creek giant dromaeosaurid do we have?

Although some holotype/referred material were of Trionychid turtle identity, there was still a good chunk of distinct dromaeosaurid bones in the D-raptor holotype. The genus Dakotaraptor is chimaeric, so the dromaeosaurid material probably has to be given a new name, kinda like Saurophaganax and Allosaurus anax. I'm not sure entirely on how chimaeras work in taxonomy tho.

Technically, its not concluded. But all the evidence points towards it being a chimera. Not entirely sure what that means for the name though, since it can't exactly be synonymous with one genus.

^ Wouldn't it be like Saurophaganax?

The turtle is referred to as "Dakotaraptor", since its the holotype, while the Dromaeosaurid material is assigned to a new genus/species?

No, because the holotype is both material from a turtle and a Dromaeosaurid

Well i mean isn’t this basically the A. anax and Saurophagnax situation, of Allosaurus material being mixed in with Sauropod material?

The genus itself I wouldn't say so, but some of its raptor material could be moved to a valid genus while the rest is moved to a valid turtle genus.

Wait so Dakotaraptor is still valid but it's just a turtle now?

^To my understanding, it’s kinda like how Saurophagnax is a Sauropod now, while the Allosaur material is now A. anax, so yeah.

From what I can gather, no.

The holotype material of Saurophaganax is all sauropod material, whereas Dakotaraptor's holotype has both turtle material AND dromaeosaurid material, making it a chimera, not just a Saurophaganax case.

So it would be as if the Allosaurus material in later specimens was assigned to Saurophaganax alongside the holotype.