Talk:Linnaean taxonomy

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

Removed from article[edit]

Removed from article pending resolution:

(This is incorrect or opinion)--Linnaean taxonomy requires creation of many more phyla than basic seven, and even then doesn't

provide full information about evolutionary relations between species. -- (This is incorrect, confusing taxonomy and classification, system and od) --To overcome this problems, cladistics was proposed as better way of classification.-- Enchanter 15:56, 29 July 2002 (UTC)

Additional taxonomic categories[edit]

The species article included the additional taxonomic(?) categories of Subphylum, Suborder, Superfamily, Subfamily, and Subspecies. Do these belong under "Linnaean taxonomy", and thus should they be discussed here? Or do they fall under something else? --Ryguasu 08:08 Jan 11, 2003 (UTC)

Superregnum?[edit]

The wiki taxonomy site starts with "Superregnum" and "regnum", where "regnum" is the animal, plant, fungus kingdom, etc. But the wiki taxonomy entry at wikipedia makes no mention of Superregnum. Can someone fix this? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 192.35.17.24 (talk) 14:13, 5 August 2005

-s/he means wikispecies
Fixed- I added domain (=superregnum), with a disclaimer, to this entry as I did to biological classification. The omission was glaring. This is one of the only problems with wikipedia- since people write based on their background knowledge, past accepted fact is perpetuated. I'll now note in another edit that domain and superregnum are equivalent, and maybe add a wikispecies in the refs. if there's not one there already. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 151.203.239.228 (talk) 00:19, 30 September 2005 (UTC)

"Cling to"[edit]

" . . . some botanists still cling to this rank . . ." Isn't that a bit strong? How about, ". . . some botanists still prefer this rank . . ." ? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.0.58.18 (talk) 07:32, 5 February 2006‎ (UTC)