Talk:Cladocera

Cladocera is an older, more commonly used, and equally valid scientific name of this superorder

This article should be entitled Cladocera and in Wikidata the recently created item Diplostraca (Q768012) should be merged with the older item Cladocera (Q391240) Sylwia Ufnalska (talk) 00:28, 6 December 2025 (UTC)

Requested move 19 August 2026

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: moved. Participants have all come to support the move. (closed by non-admin page mover) –Maltazarian ^{ᚾparley$\lor$investigateᛅ} 18:35, 26 August 2026 (UTC)

---

Diplostraca → Cladocera – The move to "Diplostraca" a few years ago was not a good decision. This article has always been about cladocerans/"water fleas", and its contents do not cover clam shrimp, which makes the current state of the article misleading because the lead makes it seem like it covers clam shrimp when it really does not (with apologies to Jts, who was just trying to make the best of a bad situation). There is no doubt that "Cladocera" is a valid clade that does not include the clam shrimp. As discussed at Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Tree_of_Life#Cladocera,_Diplostraca,_water_fleas_and_clam_shrimp, the WORMS position that Cladocera=Diplostraca is not widely accepted in the literature. Diplostraca should be made into its own page or made as a redirect to Branchiopoda where the broader macro-taxonomy can be discussed. Hemiauchenia (talk) 11:16, 19 August 2026 (UTC)

Agree that both Diplostraca and Cladocera should have articles. As I said at that TOL discussion Cladocera is stronglys supported by morphological and molecular data and widely used. WoRMS is a bit of an aberration in not using it. I'm currently agnostic on whether a move back is the best approach.  —  Jts1882 | talk  12:09, 19 August 2026 (UTC)

On the other hand the article currently says Diplostraca are nested within the clam shrimp, being most closely related to the order Cyclestherida .... This is clearly referring to clade Cladocera and changing the name generated after the page move created a nonsense statement. Support move.  —  Jts1882 | talk  12:13, 19 August 2026 (UTC)

I support splitting the two pages, which indeed would result in most of the content being moved to Cladocera. — Snoteleks (talk) 13:13, 19 August 2026 (UTC)

Given that this page was "Cladocera" to begin with and little to no content was merged from the original Diplostraca article (see this archive from 2021, showing it was just a 2 sentence stub with some bullet points showing orders and families) it makes sense to move it back to that title and then split out Diplostraca to preserve the page history. Hemiauchenia (talk) 17:15, 19 August 2026 (UTC)

Oh I see what you mean. In that case, a return to that would be preferable, yes. — Snoteleks (talk) 17:57, 19 August 2026 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.