184.108.40.206 removed the interwiki links. For what purpose? I assumed that somebody would undo the edit, but now that it hasn't been done I wonder if there wasn't a purpose I haven't seen. If I can't see a purpose in a few days and nobody has responded to this issue I intend to undo his edit. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Davefoc (talk • contribs) 07:35, 1 April 2009 (UTC)
Presentation of Phylogeny
The presentation of the new phylogenies on here seems a little bit chaotic and illogical, and a number of statements need verification (I will tag some). Do all taxonomists agree that if shovelers etc. really are more closely related to the South American dabbling duck clade, they should be placed in three or four genera? Maybe this article could identify three likely clades based onstudies so far: shovelers etc., wigeons etc., and Anas sensu stricto. And can anyone verify that wigeons and their relatives (ie, gadwall and falcated ="autosigned">—Preceding unsigned comment added by Innotata (talk • contribs) Note: by Anas sensu stricto, I meant the remainder of the genus, not just the mallard and black ducks. Innotata 19:17, 2 November 2009 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Innotata (talk • contribs)
I was doing some reading on the article about the Anas genus of waterfowl birds when I clicked on the link to Yellow-billed Pintail and something disgusting and obscene came up. I can not even edit the link/direction article to fix it so someone with better knowledge or access should probably do something. Thanks for any help with this. Epf (talk) 12:14, 21 August 2011 (UTC)
- Resolved, someone hacked into the taxobox. Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#Dodo. Sabine's Sunbird talk 20:24, 21 August 2011 (UTC)
- ...it is rather the absence of a thorough review than lack of necessity that this genus is rather over-lumped.
||This article's tone or style may not reflect the encyclopedic tone used on Wikipedia. (December 2012) (Learn how and when to remove this template message)|