Template talk:Oobox

Latest comment: 11 years ago by Ashorocetus in topic Oocohort, Oomagnorder, etc.?

Edit log

edit

The following edits have been made to the page:

Test samples

edit

Oobox
 
Elongatoolithidae in the Academy of Natural Sciences, Philadelphia
Egg fossil classification  
Basic shell type: Ornithoid
Morphotype: Ornithoid-ratite
Oofamily: Elongatoolithidae
Oogenus: Elongatoolithus
Zhao, 1975
Type oospecies
E. elongatus
(Young, 1954)
Oospecies

Oobox
Egg fossil classification  
Basic shell type: Ornithoid
Morphotype: Ornithoid-ratite
Oofamily: Oblongoolithidae
Oogenus: Oblongoolithus
Mikhailov, 1996
Type oospecies
O. glaber
Mikhailov, 1996

Oobox
Egg fossil classification  
Basic shell type: Dinosauroid-prismatic
Oofamily: Prismatoolithidae
Oogenus: Oolithus
Buckman, 1859
Type oospecies
O. laminadermus
Chao & Chang, 1974
Synonyms

Oolithes Buckman, 1859

I'll be generating a few test samples on this page to demonstrate the oobox. Due to the size of the code generated by automatic taxoboxes, we are limited to three examples on this page. Feedback is appreciated. Note that the title of the oobox will actually display the same title as the article unless otherwise specified. I've noted that the taxonomies I'm finding tend to incorporate actual taxa into the taxonomies to make them more relevant. If this is undesirable, let me know. Also, I'm wondering what color the oobox ought to be. It's been expressed at Template talk:Ichnobox that these boxes shouldn't be any of the following colors:

Animalia rgb(235,235,210)
Archaea rgb(195,245,250) also Nanoarchaeota (Nanarchaeota), Korarchaeota, Thaumarchaeota, Crenarchaeota and Euryarchaeota
Archaeplastida rgb(180,250,180) also Plantae and Viridiplantae
Bacteria rgb(220,235,245)
Eukaryota rgb(245,215,255) For eukaryotes with no other colour defined, including Excavata, Amoebozoa and Opisthokonta
Fungi rgb(145,250,250)
Ichnotaxa rgb(230,222,214)
incertae sedis rgb(250,240,230)
SAR rgb(200,250,80) also Harosa, Chromalveolata
Ootaxa rgb(250,250,220)
Viruses rgb(250,250,190) also Viroids

Bob the Wikipedian (talkcontribs) 21:33, 31 December 2010 (UTC)Reply

Should oofamily really appear under genus? Should ootaxonomy (which is really a branch of organ taxonomy) really be mixed with true taxonomy? Martin (Smith609 – Talk) 14:14, 2 January 2011 (UTC)Reply
This rather exhaustive reference was my reference in setting it up. If someone's got a more accurate guide, feel free to fix the errors. Also...I read somewhere recently that the ICZN has approved ootaxonomy, although I'm not sure to what extent. Bob the Wikipedian (talkcontribs) 21:02, 2 January 2011 (UTC)Reply
I have posted at Template talk:Taxobox colour; please place any comments regarding color there. Bob the WikipediaN (talkcontribs) 22:47, 4 February 2011 (UTC)Reply

Upgrading to the next version of {{str find}}

edit

Per the recent modifications to {{strfind short}}, it has been advised this faster and more capable template take the place of {{str find}} where possible. Because {{PAGENAMEBASE}} is a structural template at the foundation of the code of this template, this edit could potentially cause havoc if not evaluated first for soundness.

I'm requesting anyone who has enough know-how to evaluate this proposed modification respond to the RfC listed at Template talk:PAGENAMEBASE. The template is being used in this template. Bob the WikipediaN (talkcontribs) 03:26, 6 February 2011 (UTC)Reply

Oocohort, Oomagnorder, etc.?

edit

Many of the Ooboxes have the following ootaxon names: Oosuperorder, Oocohort, Oosupercohort, Ooclass, and Oomagnorder, but I cannot find any Ootaxa above Oofamily anywhere in the scientific literature. So far as I can tell, these terms are used only on Wikipedia, Paleofile, and websites using these two as sources. Should we really be using these terms on Wikipedia if they're not official terms? Ashorocetus (talk) 02:39, 13 June 2013 (UTC)Reply