Edge Rewrite
// HTMLRewriter · presentation

This page was redesigned at the edge.

Cloudflare fetched the original article and streamed it through HTMLRewriter to apply an entirely new visual system without rebuilding the source page.

Jump to content

Talk:Araneomorphae

Page contents not supported in other languages.
Add topic
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Latest comment: 15 years ago by Stfg in topic Rank?

Stub

[edit]

This article has been listed as a stub. Because of the nature of the category, the most informative content that can be provided is a list of the members of this group. I will add a drawing of the distinguishing feature of this group later. P0M 07:29, 22 Dec 2004 (UTC)

I am removing a paragraph that relates to an entirely irrelevant Suborder. The Geolycosa is an example of the Araneomorphae, which is why it is listed here: Phylum: ARTHROPODA Class: ARACHNIDA Order: Araneida Suborder: Araneomorphae Family: Lycosida Genus: Geolycosa The other spider, shown as a contrast, belongs to the Suborder Mygalomorphae. P0M 16:34, 11 Jun 2005 (UTC)

That being said, I have a hard time to understand why Sphodros rufipes has its place in here too (as there's also the photograph in its respective suborder)... it seems these articles need overhauling. FelisSchrödingeris 01:08, 7 March 2006 (UTC)Reply

Rewrite?

[edit]

This article is in need of a rewrite, I think. Most of it appears to be copy-pasted from another source, and obviously someone has removed or repositioned some pictures, because one section refers to images that aren't actually there. Edaemus (talk) 11:39, 13 February 2010 (UTC)Reply

Rank?

[edit]

Is this a suborder as stated here or an infraorder within suborder Opisthothelae as stated in Spider#Taxonomy and Wikispecies? --Stfg (talk) 14:30, 5 December 2010 (UTC)Reply

Ranks do not matter much. Mithril (talk) 15:31, 5 December 2010 (UTC)Reply
OK, I understand that view, but Wikipedia is inconsistent in its treatment of Opisthothelae and its members. I'd have the thought that the consitency does matter. --Stfg (talk) 20:38, 5 December 2010 (UTC)Reply
Since there's no rank between order and suborder, if araneomorphs are considered a suborder, Opisthothelae have no rank. To my mind the appropriate solution of the inconsistency depends on what version is more common in taxoboxes. Mithril (talk) 09:59, 6 December 2010 (UTC)Reply
I see, thanks. Unfortunately, some articles treat Araneomorphae as a suborder and some as an infraorder of Opisthothelae. I've raised the issue for spider articles as a whole at Talk:Spider#Taxonomy. What's there is about all I can do as a layman. Please would you have a look at it? --Stfg (talk) 15:02, 7 December 2010 (UTC)Reply