![]() | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
That can't be correct. Shouldn't it be Kingdom Animalia? - Dotdotdotdash 20:46, 4 October 2007 (UTC)
...Or at phylum level, because having a subphylum but not phylum listed is confusing as heck? The Mysterious El Willstro ( talk) 06:13, 28 June 2012 (UTC)
Can someone please complete the section 'Genus and families'? because it is incomplete and only has a few families and genuss Rugoconites Tenuirugosus ( talk) 18:32, 19 February 2022 (UTC)User:Rugoconites_Tenuirugosus
I feel like the new article barely uses the references from the old article, along with the fact that some of the references are outdated like how one of the references downright says " However, the six faces of the conical test and three–fold symmetry may reflect some phylogenetic connection with the larger clade of Trilobozoa, a cnidarian class that radiated during the Late Vendian–Early Cambrian and then became extinct". I feel like the article needs a clean up once again with new references. Do any of you think I should try and re-work some of the parts of this article? Since I already have a list of sources that I can use to re-work this article.
And if you're wondering what the sources are, here's a list of them:
I might've included something contradicting my first statement about the first reference, although I brought it up because it may also be used to make a section about its interpretations like how the Ausia fenestrata page does. I need to hear a professionals thoughts on this before I may be able to expand on this any further. Rugoconites Tenuirugosus ( talk) 19:47, 19 October 2022 (UTC)
![]() | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
That can't be correct. Shouldn't it be Kingdom Animalia? - Dotdotdotdash 20:46, 4 October 2007 (UTC)
...Or at phylum level, because having a subphylum but not phylum listed is confusing as heck? The Mysterious El Willstro ( talk) 06:13, 28 June 2012 (UTC)
Can someone please complete the section 'Genus and families'? because it is incomplete and only has a few families and genuss Rugoconites Tenuirugosus ( talk) 18:32, 19 February 2022 (UTC)User:Rugoconites_Tenuirugosus
I feel like the new article barely uses the references from the old article, along with the fact that some of the references are outdated like how one of the references downright says " However, the six faces of the conical test and three–fold symmetry may reflect some phylogenetic connection with the larger clade of Trilobozoa, a cnidarian class that radiated during the Late Vendian–Early Cambrian and then became extinct". I feel like the article needs a clean up once again with new references. Do any of you think I should try and re-work some of the parts of this article? Since I already have a list of sources that I can use to re-work this article.
And if you're wondering what the sources are, here's a list of them:
I might've included something contradicting my first statement about the first reference, although I brought it up because it may also be used to make a section about its interpretations like how the Ausia fenestrata page does. I need to hear a professionals thoughts on this before I may be able to expand on this any further. Rugoconites Tenuirugosus ( talk) 19:47, 19 October 2022 (UTC)