Talk:Vetulicolia

Animals Low‑importance

Vetulicolia 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

Palaeontology Mid‑importance

	Paleontology portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Palaeontology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of palaeontology-related topics and create a standardized, informative, comprehensive and easy-to-use resource on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PalaeontologyWikipedia:WikiProject PalaeontologyTemplate:WikiProject PalaeontologyPalaeontology articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Concerning V's Deuterostome Heritage

In the following article the authors describe Skeemella clavula from the Middle Cambrian Pierson Cove Formation of the Drum Mountains of Utah. It is similar to vetulicolians but also has arthropod characteristics, which they claim casts new doubt on the deuterostome affinity of vetulicolians.

Briggs, DE, Lieberman BS, Halgedahl SL & Jarrard RD (2005), A new metazoan from the Middle Cambrian of Utah and the nature of Vetulicolia. Palaeontology 48: 681-686--Likearock 14:37, 6 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Not according to: Dominguez, Patricio and Jeffries, Richard. (2003). Fossil evidence on the origin of appendicularians. Paper read at International Urochordate Meeting 2003. Abstract at [2] - URL retrieved June 22, 2006. The Mysterious El Willstro (talk) 06:36, 28 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Inclusion of Yunnanozoa

Should we adjust the taxobox to mention the possible inclusion of the Yunnnanozoa, or no? Also, I thought they were related to hemichordates.--Mr Fink 17:37, 11 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The hypothesis is that Yunnanozoans are related to, not part of, Vetulicolia. In any case, the classifications remain speculative and contentious. -- Donald Albury 13:00, 18 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Indeed. I think this article may be best structured to first detail the 'facts' (i.e. their morphology, perhaps ecology) then the more dubious business of their taxonomy. I might get onto it it now... Martin (Smith609 – Talk) 19:17, 24 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Polished up References Section

I made is consistent in format, not to mention consistently actually referenced in the Article. You're welcome. :-) Seriously, though, let's not let it get sloppy like it was again. The Mysterious El Willstro (talk) 06:38, 28 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Vetulicolia. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20090608213732/http://www.wanfangdata.com.cn:80/qikan/periodical.articles/dzxb-e/dzxb2003/0303/030301.htm to http://www.wanfangdata.com.cn/qikan/periodical.articles/dzxb-e/dzxb2003/0303/030301.htm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

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.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 16:33, 27 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Inconsistent

The article needs some serious editing, as it is highly inconsistent: the opening sentence and the Classification section describe Vetulicolia as phylum within Deuterostomia. The text contains various inconsistent statements about its classification. The latest paper (2024) is used to show a cladogram in which it is a paraphyletic stem group within Chordata. Peter coxhead (talk) 16:59, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Peter coxhead Agreed, and I'm happy to take this on as I've been working on some adjacent projects and have a bunch of relevant papers downloaded already. "Taxonomy and evolution", "Classification", and much of what is now the introduction need to be merged. Much of the rest of the introduction should go in an "Anatomy" or "Description" section, and the footnote should be given a short "Etymology" section as many other pages have. The introduction needs to concisely give the just the most up-to-date theory or theories.

The Saccorhytus stuff can be removed (except possibly for a brief note to keep anyone from re-adding it) as it's pretty solidly proven to be unreleated. The arthropod theory should be briefly explained without distracting from the main line of evidence associating Vetulicolians with Chordates.

I am thinking along these lines, using [brackets] for text without its own subheading:

[concise introduction] (revised 1st paragrah)
Etymology (basically that footnote)
Description (2nd paragraph of current introduction)
Ecology and lifestyle (as-is)
Taxonomy and evolution (see above)
- [brief history of placement debate]
- Phylogeny (cladogram and, if it seems like no well-sourced cladogram can cover everything, tree listing of all species)

I will also do more source and citation tidying, as I find the current text unreadable because the citations are so enormous (thank you to everyone who added detailed citations!) I tend to use the harvnb form, and will migrate to that unless someone will be really upset about it (I'm happy to do extra work to make it all consistent).

I'll give it a bit to see if anyone objects here and then follow the above plan. Alternate plans are welcome, and I don't feel possessive- I just like to write out a plan on the talk page before doing major rework if a page has a history of discussions.

Ixat totep (talk) 22:46, 10 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Some of the confusion seems to have been introduced when someone tried to remove the Linnaean terms in favor of cladistic ones, leading to over-use of "clade" for a group that is likely to be an evolutionary grade. Since Vetulicolians were discovered well into the cladistic era, I'm inclined to favor that terminology throughout, and only note the Linnaean ranks in the discussion of the history of classification and placement. "Vetulicolia" has been assigned various ranks, and trying to use those consistently in the text would be a hassle.

With that in mind, more neutral terms like "group" or "taxon" are probably best except when discussing theories that specifically advocate for clade or grade. As always, alternate proposals are welcome.

Ixat totep (talk) 23:01, 10 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Ixat totep: all seems good to me. Peter coxhead (talk) 07:44, 11 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]