|WikiProject Geology / Periods||(Rated B-class, Top-importance)|
|WikiProject Palaeontology||(Rated B-class, High-importance)|
|Wikipedia CD Selection|
Since this article is about Silurian time, I changed the subdivision descriptions to reflect this - epoch rather than series (which refers to the rocks) and early/late rather than lower/upper for the same reason. This is also more consistent with other geological time period articles.--Geologyguy 16:56, 27 May 2006 (UTC)
AMK152 proposed in edits of 27 December 2006 a geotimebox for this article as follows:
|Eon:||Proterozoic • Phanerozoic • Future|
|Era:||Neoproterozoic • Paleozoic • Mesozoic|
|Period:||Ordovician • Silurian • Devonian|
I feel that the box information that is appropriate for the article is already in the footer, and that other extraenous information, such as previous eras, can be supplied where important, by links from the text. I removed the geotimebox and left the footer, pending discussion. --Bejnar 21:13, 27 December 2006 (UTC)
"Pridoli epoch" vs. "Přídolí epoch"
I don't doubt that Přídolí is the proper spelling in Czech of the place after which the Pridoli epoch is named. But can anyone provide a substantial reference for calling the "Pridoli epoch" the "Přídolí epoch" in English? There is plenty of evidence for "Pridoli epoch" in English, see, e.g. The Pridoli, GeoWhen Database, etc. --Bejnar (talk) 13:14, 20 November 2007 (UTC)
- We (Wikipedia) have had pretty good consensus to use the ICS nomenclature... but they are pretty inconsistent in this case! Under the title "GSSP for the Ludlow – Pridolí Boundary" (accent on final i), they refer to the "Pridoli Series" (no marks at all) but use diacritics on the location names such as Požáry Section, then in what appears to be the primary reference for the stage, cite "Přídoli Series" (marks on r and initial i but not final i). I'd say we're on our own on this one, whatever our consensus decides. Personally, I tend to appreciate proper non-English accents and so on in proper names used in English, though I would not get very upset if they were not used. Cheers Geologyguy (talk) 15:20, 20 November 2007 (UTC)
- The USGS appears, and it may only be an appearance, to use Pridoli, without diacritics. "Divisions of Geologic Time—Major Chronostratigraphic and Geochronologic Units" USGS and "Strategraphis Nomenclature and Description" Suggestions to Authors of the Reports of the United States Geological Survey But those usages are in tables. --Bejnar (talk) 20:03, 20 November 2007 (UTC)
Links to Groups
Though they are intended to be, I'm not at all sure that the links within the 'subdivisions' section to the Ludlow, Wenlock and Llandovery groups are helpful to the reader as these are simply former divisions made by British geologists and do not correspond directly with the epochs which this section primarily deals with. The linked pages comprise material from Encyclopaedia Britannica 1911 edition, much of the content of which has been superceded in any case. Overall the unsuspecting, non-expert reader is more likely to be misled. cheers Geopersona (talk) 05:28, 29 April 2013 (UTC)
Link to English version of graph 1?
Since the source image and corresponding text for Ref. 1 is in German, it's inclusion in the English version of Wikipedia is a hindrance to understanding. Someone modified and translated a version into English (see thumbnail), which I propose should replace the link, but I can't seem to figure out to change the figure. Animalparty (talk) 19:57, 26 October 2013 (UTC)
This is a group that has been overlooked in the article. For example, Prototaxites, which was probably a fungus or lichen, would have been the tallest organism of the late Silurian. In addition, since fossilized hyphae and spores of other terrestrial fungi recovered from Wisconsin date as early as Ordovician (460 Ma), and have probably colonized land considerably earlier than plants, the statement "Life also began to appear on land..." in the introduction to the article, is incorrect. Belsavis (talk) 12:12, 3 November 2013 (UTC)
In the upper right table of the Wikipedia page on the Silurian, the beginning of the Silurian should be changed from 443.4 to 443.8 according to the 2015 Geologic Time Scale published by the ICS (http://www.stratigraphy.org/ICSchartChronostratChart2015-01.pdf). In the upper right table of the Wikipedia page on the Ordovician, the end of the Ordovician should be changed from 443.4 to 443.8 according to the 2015 Geologic Time Scale published by the ICS (http://www.stratigraphy.org/ICSchartChronostratChart2015-01.pdf).188.8.131.52 (talk) 08:08, 2 June 2015 (UTC)rashisir184.108.40.206 (talk) 08:08, 2 June 2015 (UTC)
Flora and fauna
The following sentence appears in this section:
The first bony fish, the Osteichthyes, appeared, represented by the Acanthodians covered with bony scales; fish reached considerable diversity and developed movable jaws, adapted from the supports of the front two or three gill arches.
Acanthodians are the sister clade of Osteichthyes (also known as "bony fishes"). Many non-bony fishes had bones. Placoderms and Acanthodians for example. Bony fish were named after a new kind of bone called endochondral bone, as opposed to the old kind which was dermal bone. Movable jaws are a completely different subject: that would be the first jawed fishes, the oldest known variety of which is placoderms. I think jawed fishes are thought to have originated about 460 mya, Osteichthyes (bony fish) circa 420 mya. Zyxwv99 (talk) 21:56, 18 July 2015 (UTC)