Talk:Acochlidiacea
Add topic | This article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||
 | A fact from Acochlidiacea appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know column on 10 December 2010. The text of the entry was as follows:
|  |
Overly precise species counts?
[edit]I feel that the number of species in the Diversity section of the taxobox and corresponding Description section is unnecessarily exact and simply clutters up an already cluttered taxobox:
- 30 species (including one described and one undescribed species of Aitengidae) in 2010
- 32 species in 2011
- 33 species in 2012 + 9 undescribed
It is very likely that the "exact" species count will be change over time, and the citation of three different numbers differing by 3 contributes no meaningful information about the taxon. It would be much more succinct to state "Approx. 30"., or similar, with corresponding citations, and devote more text to the organisms themselves. Animalparty (talk) 18:06, 4 November 2013 (UTC)
Higher classification
[edit]This is probably a larger topic for the Mollusca in general, but I think we should probably follow the taxonomy on Molluscabase, yes? http://molluscabase.org/aphia.php?p=taxdetails&id=10062 Gastropoda (Class) Heterobranchia (Subclass) Euthyneura (Infraclass) Tectipleura (Subterclass) Acochlidiimorpha (Superorder) Acochlidioidea (Superfamily)
However, I don't know how big of a can of worms this reclassification will be for other mollusc taxon pages on wikipedia, so I'm a bit hesitant to start a complete taxonomic overhaul... — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jesseseeem (talk • contribs) 01:42, 30 July 2020 (UTC)
Acochlidiimorpha vs Acochlidiomorpha
[edit]Acochlidiimorpha vs Acochlidiomorpha, both correct, alternative spellings?--Estopedist1 (talk) 20:38, 5 May 2021 (UTC)