Talk:Xenoturbella

New review article

http://www.zoologicalletters.com/content/1/1/22

©Geni (talk) 00:40, 30 September 2015 (UTC)

News coverage

• http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-35482467 -- The Anome (talk) 21:12, 3 February 2016 (UTC)

• More original coverage is published in Nature, with its position on the tree of life made more certain, part of Xenacoelomorpha similar to a basal urbilaterian. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 11:07, 4 February 2016 (UTC)

Phylum?

According to the Xenacoelomorpha article, it is a clade, not a phylum. Which is correct?160.111.254.17 (talk) 15:28, 31 January 2017 (UTC)

Clade would be a more generic term for a grouping. See the infobox says its a phylum. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 10:42, 1 February 2017 (UTC)

As pointed out by Μετάknowledge (see Talk:Xenacoelomorpha), modern biologists are more concerned with identifying which clades receive which statistical support than finding how these clades fit into standard taxonomic ranks. 'Clade' would therefore be the most pragmatic term. Manudouz (talk) 11:47, 1 February 2017 (UTC)

It would appear that Xenacoelomorpha is a clade, and the taxobox should reflect this. Clade names have no taxonomic rank. 160.111.254.17 (talk) 14:20, 6 February 2017 (UTC)

Contested deletion

This page should not be speedily deleted because... (Is a good page) --179.4.175.57 (talk) 16:08, 1 March 2019 (UTC)

You will be glad to know, then, that I removed the speedy deletion tag. Odd that you put it up yourself though. ubiquity (talk) 16:15, 1 March 2019 (UTC)