Talk:Carnivoramorpha

Taxobox

I'm trying to get the taxobox to list Order=Carnivoramorpha, and Inclusive of Order Carnivora and Order Miacoidea, and then Superfamilies: Viverraroidea, Caniformia, Feliformia. Is there a way to do this? there's no reason why a classification cannot have more than one Order. That's the difference between a horizontal and a vertical phylogenetic taxonomy. Valich 08:05, 18 February 2007 (UTC)

Carnivora is indeed nested within Carnivoramorpha, but is it right to call the latter an "order"? The idea behind assigning ranks to taxa is that only taxa of lower rank are nested within one of higher rank. This situation might be an argument for dispensing with ranks altogether. But if we are going to use ranks in taxoboxes, it seems only one of those two nodes should be called an "order".

Cephal-odd 18:17, 29 September 2007 (UTC)

That paper by stiles is obviously student work and should not be used as a ref in this article, when all other aticles are peer reviewed work. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.73.245.55 (talk) 22:11, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

clades, crown and otherwise

The article's introduction previously called Carnivoramorpha a "crown clade". But I think what was meant is that it is a node-based clade, defined by the last commmon ancestor of two or more subsidiary clades. Today, calling a taxon a crown clade usually means that it arises from the last common ancestor of the extant members of the group. Cephal-odd 18:21, 29 September 2007 (UTC)

Its actaully a stem based clade. Its crown carnivora and all fossils more closely related to that order than any other mammalian group. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 160.39.41.26 (talk) 23:02, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

Copyright issue

This article was created by a contributor with an unfortunate history of copying content from other sources. I'm sorry to say that this seems to have tainted this article as well. For one example, compare the following:

When Carnivoramorpha first emerged in the Paleocene they were not the only group of terrestrial meat-eating mammals present. The Creodonta (oxyaenids and hyaenodontids) were also present and, judging from their dentitions, many were specialized meat eaters and must be included in any study addressing the evolution of mammalian carnivory. In North America few creodonts survived past the Eocene, and all were extinct by the late Oligocene (Gunnell 1998). The taxonomic decline of Creodonta and the end of the Eocene coincided with the beginning of the radiation of Carnivora, and the origination of most modern families. Regardless of whether this was taxonomic displacement or replacement this pattern has generated the hypothesis that the diversification of carnivorans was suppressed by the incumbent creodonts early in their history (Van Valkenburgh 1999).

This comes from here.

The article still says:

When Carnivoramopha first emerged in the Paleocene they were not the only group of terrestrial meat-eating mammals present. The Creodonta, composed of the Oxyaenids (robust, short-limbed wolverine forms) and the Hyaenodontids (slender-limbed, semi-cursorial forms), were also present and were well on their way toward their maximum speciation, which occurred in the middle Eocene era (Stiles, 2005). Judging from their dentitions, many were specialized meat eaters and must be included in any study addressing the evolution of mammalian carnivory. In North America few creodonts survived past the Eocene, and all were extinct by the late Oligocene. The taxonomic decline of Creodonta at the end of the Eocene coincided with the beginning of the speciation and radiation of the Carnivora, and the origination of most modern carnivore families. Regardless of whether this was taxonomic displacement or replacement this pattern has generated the hypothesis that the diversification of carnivorans was suppressed by the incumbent creodonts early in their history.

In accordance with our copyright policies (see Wikipedia:C and WP:CV), the article should be rewritten to eliminate all text added by the original contributor, unless we are able to verify that certain texts are not copied. This is difficult to do, I'm afraid, particularly as in some other articles he has utilized content behind a pay wall. --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 15:11, 8 September 2013 (UTC)

There is not much salvageable content here. I'm going to ping the relevant wikiproject and see if someone might be interested in stubbing it out from scratch. John Reaves 17:23, 10 November 2013 (UTC)

Now I see that you already did. I'll move it to the bottom of the page and see if that helps at all. John Reaves 17:26, 10 November 2013 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Carnivoramorpha. 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/20070929152635/http://academic.evergreen.edu/s/stidav22/reports/Vulpes%20Phylogeny%20Report.pdf to http://academic.evergreen.edu/s/stidav22/reports/Vulpes%20Phylogeny%20Report.pdf
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060911232227/http://home.gwu.edu/~agordon/PRG/Wesley-Hunt%202005.pdf to http://home.gwu.edu/~agordon/PRG/Wesley-Hunt%202005.pdf

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

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: 18 January 2022).

• 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) 23:17, 15 November 2016 (UTC)