Talk:Halvaria

Untitled

"Stramenopiles and the Alveolata are not related, yet forming a reduced chromalveolate clade."

This is nonsensical, as all living organisms are related to one another. It is also seemingly contradictory, as it suggests they are not related, yet they form a clade. Finally, it is grammatically incorrect (should be "...form a reduced..."). — Preceding unsigned comment added by 147.26.87.13 (talk) 17:33, 29 September 2014 (UTC)

I've restored an earlier version of the article.Deuterostome (talk) 00:49, 1 May 2015 (UTC)

Please confirm classification

The WikiProject classification for Halvaria is Start-class. However, the page has less than 100 words, so it might not meet the grading criteria. If it should be a stub, then please set |class=Stub on this talk page & reinstate the stub tag(s) on the article page.   ~ Tom.Reding (talk ⋅dgaf)  14:11, 11 July 2016 (UTC)

"halvaria", Not "Halvaria"

We should delete the Cavalier-Smith 2010 authority in the taxobox. Cavalier-Smith proposed it as "halvaria", not "Halvaria". See: https://doi.org/10.1098/rsbl.2009.0948 Later people started using the name "Halvaria", that's it. Jako96 (talk) 18:04, 26 April 2025 (UTC)

Oppose. According to Thomas Cavalier-Smith himself:

• Infrakingdom Halvaria Cavalier-Smith, 2010 doi:10.1016/j.ympev.2015.07.004
• [...] possibly such detachment could have evolved in the common ancestor of Halvaria (Alveolata and Heterokonta) after it diverged from Rhizaria [...] & Possibly in Rhizaria and all eukaryotes other than Halvaria and Viridiplantae the cp does not rotate [...] doi:10.1016/j.protis.2011.10.006
• Our multiprotein trees confirm that Rhizaria are sisters of infrakingdom Halvaria (Alveolata, Heterokonta) & Accordingly, Cavalier-Smith (2010a) formally grouped Rhizaria (as an infrakingdom) with Halvaria as new chromist subkingdom Harosa, which is universally accepted as a robust clade including Rhizaria. doi:10.1007/s00709-018-1241-1

There is literally no reason to believe that this name is to be used in lowercase. — Snoteleks (talk) 19:09, 26 April 2025 (UTC)

I didn't say we should change halvaria to Halvaria. I said we should just remove the taxon authority from the taxobox. There are taxa that do not have authority in the wiki. Jako96 (talk) 19:51, 26 April 2025 (UTC)

This taxon has authority. — Snoteleks (talk) 20:06, 26 April 2025 (UTC)

But it was proposed as halvaria. Not Halvaria. Jako96 (talk) 20:17, 26 April 2025 (UTC)

"halvaria" has authority. Jako96 (talk) 20:18, 26 April 2025 (UTC)

Taxa that are proposed with bad grammar or failure to capitalize correctly as per guidelines do not have authority. Mr Fink (talk) 20:31, 26 April 2025 (UTC)

@Apokryltaros There is no guideline that erases authority on the basis of bad grammar. You are thinking of the International Code of Nomenclature for algae, fungi, and plants, which corrects grammatical errors for taxon names, as opposed to the International Code of Zoological Nomenclature which interprets grammar mistakes as part of the valid taxon names. This taxon is not explicitly governed by either of them, but even if it was, there is no such thing as removing authority. — Snoteleks (talk) 21:00, 26 April 2025 (UTC)

Actually, yeah. Maybe we should not do anything. Now I think Snoteleks is right. Jako96 (talk) 21:13, 26 April 2025 (UTC)

Wait, in his 2022 article he used a new clade name, eucorta. Which its first letter was lowercase. Aside from the figure, also in text he called it eucorta, not Eucorta. So, the Cavalier-Smith 2010 authority should be deleted. Jako96 (talk) 08:10, 22 June 2025 (UTC)

@Snoteleks @Apokryltaros Jako96 (talk) 08:24, 22 June 2025 (UTC)

@Jako96 According to Cavalier-Smith's philosophy, there is no difference between lowercase and uppercase latinized clade names; both are formal in his particular point of view. He uses lowercase clade names for clades that include taxa present in more than one of his "kingdoms" (such as eucorta), while he reserves uppercase clade names for clades within the same kingdom. Therefore, I think there's no reason to remove the authority unless the clade names are not formal (e.g., photokaryotes and corticates are informal names, they are not latinized). He also disobeys his own philosophy sometimes (e.g., Corticata includes both kingdoms Plantae and Chromista, and he only made it uppercase as a reaction against Diaphoretickes). It's very messy, and I think it's better for consistency if we just give it authority as if it was anyone else's taxon. — Snoteleks (talk) 12:53, 22 June 2025 (UTC)

I think you're right. Jako96 (talk) 13:17, 22 June 2025 (UTC)