Talk:Florideophyceae

Article name

I suggest to change the name of the Florideae article to "Florideophyceae". In the International Code of Nomenclature for algae, fungi, and plants, all of the class names in the algae are ended with "-phyceae". "Florideae" also is not used colloquially to refer to this group. Therefore, I cannot see a good reason for the name "Florideae" to be maintained. YuriBossolan (talk) 04:05, 28 January 2021 (UTC)

Requested move 2 March 2022

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. (closed by non-admin page mover) 🐶 EpicPupper ^{(he/him | talk)} 03:54, 9 March 2022 (UTC)

---

Florideae → Florideophyceae – See the #Article name section above. I was quite confused by the page title being different from the name used in the lead. 1234 kb of .rar files (is this dangerous?) 01:33, 2 March 2022 (UTC)

• Support. Something seems to have got mixed up here, but as far as I can tell Florideophyceae is the thing discussed in the article. I can't even find good evidence that Florideae is a junior synonym of that. YorkshireExpat (talk) 18:53, 2 March 2022 (UTC)
• Support per nom and Yorkshire. --Spekkios (talk) 01:28, 9 March 2022 (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.

Stub

Could someone add more details about pit connections, the triphasic life cycle, lack of flagella, etc. These organisms seem more interesting than this article suggests. ~2026-33797-94 (talk) 11:29, 8 June 2026 (UTC)