The original name of the "Kingdom" was ARCHEBACTERIA: International code of nomenclature of bacteria (1990 revision). Yellrifle1828 (talk) 16:52, 15 July 2010 (UTC)
In Spanish, the vernacular name is arquea. Pablo Castellanos 21:50, 15 October 2009 (UTC)
- "Arks?" Just a orthography geek-quibble, but it should be "Archs," if a fluffy, non-scientific jargon is to be used at all. Just using "these life forms," would seem a little less "cutesy," to me. Yellrifle1828 (talk) 16:50, 15 July 2010 (UTC)
Since the page seems to be blocked, someone with the right to should perform the following edits:
- The second "references" section below "vernacular names" needs to be merged into the one above.
- Replace "The arks separate identity" with "The archaean's separate identity"
- Replace the sentence "Originally archaea called ark-bacteria (?) and other prokaryotic was called ... " with "After the discovery of two different groups of organisms withing the bacteria kingdom, it was split into the two superkingdoms Archaebacteria and Eubacteria. Later, the name Archaebacteria was shortened to Archaea, and Eubacteria to Bacteria."
- Done (though you could have done it yourself, it is only locked against unregistered (IP number) edits, due to a past history of vandalism) - MPF (talk) 10:56, 10 October 2010 (UTC)
No it is locked for anybody (I am a registered user). Btw the greek name in the lower table should be Ελληνικά: Αρχαία (Αρχαιοβακτήρια) but I cannot make the edit myself:) --Κλειδοκράτωρ (talk) 12:25, 16 January 2011 (UTC)
- The Bulgarian translation should read "Археи" (plural) not "Археа" (singular). --184.108.40.206 05:30, 19 June 2011 (UTC)
IMO the Archaea need an update after NCBI. My proposal is here: User:Murma174/Archaea. I'm aware, that there is no official classification of procaryotes, but the NCBI taxonomy is widely accepted. --Murma174 (talk) 09:02, 16 July 2016 (UTC)
<- discussion moved here from Village Pump ->
- My one cent: I think you can go ahead with the NCBI scheme, but leave out for now the elaboration on the Candidatus parts. Mariusm (talk) 06:39, 18 July 2016 (UTC)
- @Mariusm: Yes, the Candidati are the doubtful part. Do you think, I shouldn't mention them at all? Or mention them, but not create a separate page for them? --Murma174 (talk) 07:03, 18 July 2016 (UTC)