Talk:Bolboceratidae

"Controversy" regarding family status

This appears to be a taxon subject to "nomenclatural inertia". Existing phylogenetic evidence (e.g., McKenna et al., 2015) strongly supports the separation of Bolboceratidae from Geotrupidae, but two of the major classifications that have been published since 1995 (Smith, 2006 and Bousquet et al., 2011) continued to treat it as a subfamily, and McKenna et al. did not formally propose a revised classification. This has resulted in a schism here in Wikipedia and also in Wikispecies; ordinarily, major papers on classification are treated as reliable sources, and the MOST RECENT classifications normally are given heavier weight. In this case, however, the most recent classifications did not present any evidence or justification for continuing to treat bolboceratids as a subfamily, so it is not exactly as if the authors were actively disputing the split proposed in 1995, so much as preferring the status quo. If editors give these classification papers heavier weight than the phylogenetic papers, WP and Wikispecies will thereby contradict the best available evidence for taxon relationships (in fact, McKenna et al, gave evidence that even Taurocerastinae is not related to Geotrupidae, so it's very much a mess). This note here will serve both as notice and explanation as to why I am rejecting the classification papers and following the phylogenetic papers in this particular case.Dyanega (talk) 23:04, 12 March 2018 (UTC)