Talk:Gorgonian

A fact from Gorgonian appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know column on 23 August 2005. The text of the entry was as follows:

Did you know... that a sea fan is a form of sessile colonial cnidarian, similar to a sea pen or a soft coral, found in tropical and subtropical seawater?

A record of the entry may be seen at Wikipedia:Recent additions/2005/August.

Wikipedia

Marine life (inactive)

This redirect 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

Animals Low‑importance

Gorgonian 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 redirect 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

Sea fan vs. Gorgonia

In my last edit, I was primarily adding information on gorgonia ecology. However, I took the liberty of replacing most references of "sea fan" with "gorgonia." I'm not married to the word gorgonia, but for some reason it just seems better to me.. I think Sea fan was unwieldy (it is rare that the common name is more unwiedly). Any opinions? I will see if I can find some additional policy statements/recommendation on this. WDavis1911 05:18, 22 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

name

Currently, the lead starts with the name "gordonacea". But the lead also says that name is completely outdated and wrong.

The page title is gorgonian. Why? Why not gorgonia (which has more google book hits, but redirects to this page)? Or should this page be merged with the article titled by the current order name? Cesiumfrog (talk) 02:09, 23 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Even with the title change, it's odd to lead by identifying them with an invalid taxon, but sea fans are a subset of Alcyonacea, two of Alcyonacea's six suborders, and those two don't form a natural group. So I don't think this is fully resolved yet. Dirk Mcbratney (talk) 04:40, 18 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Really messed up article

I have restored the merge template as this article is located at what it admits is an outdated term. Not only that, but the first word of the article does not match the title but does match the current terminology. --Khajidha (talk) 15:10, 11 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Gorgonian. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20050913050133/http://www.seawater.no/fauna/Nesledyr/hornkorall.htm to http://www.seawater.no/fauna/Nesledyr/hornkorall.htm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 12:00, 21 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]