Talk:List of Ediacaran genera

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the List of Ediacaran genera article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Lists

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Lists, an attempt to structure and organize all list pages on Wikipedia. If you wish to help, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.ListsWikipedia:WikiProject ListsTemplate:WikiProject ListsList articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Indexes

This alphabetical index of Wikipedia articles falls within the scope of the WikiProject Indexes. This is a collaborative effort to create, maintain, and improve alphabetical indexes on Wikipedia.IndexesWikipedia:WikiProject IndexesTemplate:WikiProject IndexesIndexes articles

Palaeontology High‑importance

	Paleontology portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Palaeontology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of palaeontology-related topics and create a standardized, informative, comprehensive and easy-to-use resource on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PalaeontologyWikipedia:WikiProject PalaeontologyTemplate:WikiProject PalaeontologyPalaeontology articles
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Order

It would be far more useful to order this page by affiliation (e.g. rangeomorph, shelly fossil, ichnogenus) than alphabetically. Martin (Smith609 – Talk) 01:14, 21 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, but can you categorise every genus there? Originally I copied the list from the Spanish wikipedia, and for most of them all we have is the name. The idea was to have an article or redirect for each listed name. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 21:38, 21 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

References and format

I think it would be much better to have proper references instead than the (Name, Year) format attached to each genus. Also, converting to a table format would be nice. See 2012 in arthropod paleontology to have an idea of what I mean (note that not all columns etc. would make necessarily sense here, it's just to give an idea of how it could look like) --Cyclopia ^talk 15:46, 13 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Name	Validity	Taxonomy	Authors	Year	Notes	Images
Andiva^[1]		Proarticulata	Fedonkin	2002	First discovered in 1977 but described only in 2002.

Would something like this fly? --Cyclopia ^talk 18:53, 13 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

W-Wow, I didn't expect people to actually do that on behalf of me! Thanks Alnagov!!--Cyclopia ^talk 21:10, 14 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I feel like bringing back the image part of this table, should I do that alongside adding a short description to every Animal in this article based off of the short description they describe when editing the article about that genus? Since I think it'll give off more information about the animal itself through an image and a short description without having to visit its article (and yes I understand that images might take a while to turn into a respectable size for the table, but if something similar to an image size converter than be somehow implemented into this table as seen above with that picture of Andiva, it'll give a more lively vibe). Rugoconites Tenuirugosus (talk) 20:08, 13 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Replying to my comment: I wound also need to cite a source to that short description, although if there's practically no sources to back up that description within the article (or if the article doesn't exist) it won't be added (although this just makes me wonder, why do the short descriptions within the tables of this article on every section of a different animal not provide any sources to support that description?). Rugoconites Tenuirugosus (talk) 20:10, 13 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I think there is no need to add a fossil description here. It's just a list, like a table of contents in a book. Do not overload the list with information, it will only spoil it. Too lazy to click on the link to get information? Read about the concept of hypertext, on which most encyclopedias, reference books and Wikipedia are built. Aleksey (Alnagov (talk) 20:45, 13 October 2022 (UTC))[reply]

I agree, although if it there isn't any need for there being a fossil description, why is there a description of the animal on the tables for some of the organisms here? Rugoconites Tenuirugosus (talk) 06:20, 14 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

These are only very brief notes for invalid and questionable taxa. Aleksey (Alnagov (talk) 10:01, 14 October 2022 (UTC))[reply]

References

^ Fedonkin, M. A. (2002). "Andiva ivantsovi gen. et sp. n. and related carapace‐bearing Ediacaran fossils from the Vendian of the Winter Coast, White Sea, Russia". Italian Journal of Zoology. 69 (2): 175–181. doi:10.1080/11250000209356456.

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 5 external links on List of Ediacaran genera. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Y An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 20:25, 17 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 8 external links on List of Ediacaran genera. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 04:32, 25 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Yuria

Yuria links to a page about a Japanese musician. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mlvluu (talk • contribs) 22:40, 5 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Palaeospinther

The part with Palaeospinther and when it was described is wrong, Menasova first described the genus Palaeospinther in 2003, not 2006. See https://www.academia.edu/12946537/Upper_Vendian_macrofossils_of_Eastern_Europe_Middle_Dniester_area_and_Volhynia for justification Rugoconites Tenuirugosus (talk) 17:21, 19 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Ikaria wariootia

This page should be included in the chart 99.229.125.74 (talk) 05:12, 22 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

[andiva-1] Fedonkin, M. A. (2002). "Andiva ivantsovi gen. et sp. n. and related carapace‐bearing Ediacaran fossils from the Vendian of the Winter Coast, White Sea, Russia". Italian Journal of Zoology. 69 (2): 175–181. doi:10.1080/11250000209356456.

[1]