Talk:Aurelia (cnidarian)

Animals Low‑importance

Aurelia (cnidarian) is within the scope of WikiProject Animals, an attempt to better organize information in articles related to animals and zoology. For more information, visit the project page.AnimalsWikipedia:WikiProject AnimalsTemplate:WikiProject Animalsanimal articles

Low

This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

WikiProject Animals To-do:

Here are some Open Tasks :

Copyedit:
Merge: GLAM/ARKive donated texts into articles about endangered species.
Improve: Photoperiodism, Tool use by non-human animals, Omnivore, Animal suicide, Sphaerium beckmani (a species in family Sphaeriidae),
Requests:
- Mammals:
- Invertebrates: Campocraspedon
- Fishes: Zaniolepis frenata
Merge: GLAM/ARKive donated texts into articles about endangered species.
Expand: Junqueira cow, Atka mackerel
Nominate and vote: Science collaboration of the month, Article Improvement Drive, WikiProject Animals Collaboration

Marine life (inactive)

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Marine life, a project which is currently considered to be inactive.Marine lifeWikipedia:WikiProject Marine lifeTemplate:WikiProject Marine lifeMarine life articles

Merger proposal

I've proposed merging Aurelia aurita to this article. As the Aurelia aurita article indicates, nearly anything that can be said about A. aurita applies to the genus as a whole, and indeed differentiation of species within this genus is difficult. Anything that does apply specifically to A. aurita can go in its own section. Thoughts? Dohn joe (talk) 22:16, 12 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Unsure I think they probably be kept separate, as this article states "There are at least 13 species in the genus Aurelia including many that are still not formally described". To write about the genus as a whole based only on A aurita would not be correct in my opinion. That said, I get your point that much of what is in the A. aurita article applies to the genus, but this is probably best dealt with by using sources in the A. aurita article in the genus article. SmartSE (talk) 22:29, 12 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose. If this article is mostly about a single species, then the specific information should be moved into the other article and the generic information retained here. Bob the Wikipedian ^{(talk • contribs)} 02:25, 13 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]