Talk:Markuelia
| This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Markuelia article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
| Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
 | This article is rated Stub-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Is this a practical joke? I started reading the new scientist article, and found it odd that the picture was titled 'The penis worm, Markuelia,' or similar, which seems a bit odd, seeing as penis is not mentioned in their article at http://www.newscientisttech.com/article.ns?id=mg19125645.600&feedId=online-news_rss20 at all. http://www.cnn.com/2006/TECH/science/08/09/fossil.embroys.ap/index.html conatins the quote ""The results are truly orgasmic," said Philip C. Donoghue, a paleontologist at Bristol University in England who led the team that created the images.", which sounds out of charecter. I beleive the biggest proof is that "Markuelia" doe not appear to be in any sources not from the AP, Bristol, or Wikipedia itself. 86.128.120.153 21:37, 11 August 2006 (UTC)
- Ah yes, and recent research has been conducted by Dong et al. Apparently Nature is in on the "penis worm" joke. But see Priapulida. --Wetman 23:35, 11 August 2006 (UTC)
- So what to do? Matthew Clark 86.128.120.153 15:14, 12 August 2006 (UTC)
- Ah yes, and recent research has been conducted by Dong et al. Apparently Nature is in on the "penis worm" joke. But see Priapulida. --Wetman 23:35, 11 August 2006 (UTC)
At least I suppose that Markuelia is not "a genus of fossil annelid worms", since it is said to be "the closest known relatives to three modern taxa of bilaterian animals: the Loricifera, Kinorhyncha and Priapulida", which do not belong to annelids, and, according to 18S rRNA sequence analysis, are not even closely related to them. Sampo Tiensuu 08:58, 22 August 2006 (UTC)
- Since I've been silly, let me make an amateur's attempt to shape up this article. --Wetman 21:52, 22 August 2006 (UTC)
External links modified edit
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Markuelia. 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/20080307025457/http://palaeo.gly.bris.ac.uk/donoghue/page2/page22/page22.html to http://palaeo.gly.bris.ac.uk/donoghue/page2/page22/page22.html
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: 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) 19:18, 3 June 2017 (UTC)