Template talk:Bacteria classification
|WikiProject Medicine||(Rated Template-class)|
It is widely believed that LUCA is between Archaea and Bacteria. "Eubacteria" is monophyly.
However, Thomas Cavalier-Smith is insisted on (LUCA is in Eobacteria). "Eubacteria" is paraphyly.
The classification system of Thomas Cavalier-Smith is based on this theory. Moreover, if the classification system of Thomas Cavalier-Smith is used, it is necessary to include Archaea in Bacteria. I think that it is safer to use Bergey's Manual now. --Krclathrate (talk) 19:25, 28 April 2009 (UTC)
- I believe that most of the terms and relationships in this template are affirmed by researchers other than Cavalier-Smith. Please be more specific in your objection. --Arcadian (talk) 19:45, 28 April 2009 (UTC)
After reading the Terrabacteria article, it seems that it doesn't want to agree with where it is on this template. There's no article Glidobacteria to link the place in the tree to - suggestions for fixing?
Batcerial phyla 
As there are 29 accepted phyla in Bacteria and the whole thing gets confusing, the article bacterial phyla was made. Can it be fitted in here? (For obvious reasons, it does not follow Cavalier-Smith, but Woese and the online taxonomic outline (=Bergey's but updated), LPSN and others) --Squidonius (talk) 20:59, 3 January 2011 (UTC)
The included template "Bacteria navs" is bugged. A somewhat fix is to replace the template with this code: code begin> Medicine:Bacterial infection · Bacteria (Bacteria classification) · Gram-positive firmicutes diseases/Gram-positive actinobacteria diseases(Tuberculosis)/Gram-negative proteobacterial diseases(Cholera)/Gram-negative non-proteobacterial bacterial diseases · drug(Protein synthesis inhibitor antibiotics, Cell wall disruptive antibiotics, Nucleic acid inhibitors, Antimycobacterials, Vaccines) 22.214.171.124 15:58, 23 August 2011 (UTC)