From Wikispecies
Jump to navigation Jump to search

The current definition is exactly same as the one given in, at So there is a potential copyright violation. The source page does say " is designed as a free, browsable resource for all." But exact copyright terms are unclear. --Sivaraj 18:13, 16 Jan 2005 (UTC)

The passage has been removed on grounds of both "copyvio" and that descriptive content belongs on Wikipedia, not Wikispecies --Georgeryp 13:37, 11 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Internal inconsistency around superregnum Archaea regna[edit]

The definition on this page appears not to be the same as the above link! That page describes Korarchaeota as a kingdom in superregnum Archaea, which is not what this page says.

  • Archaebacteria is here said to be a regnum in Archaea, but on page Archaea it is not among the four regna. The page Archaebacteria is a redirect to Archaea!
  • On page Archaea Korarchaeota is a regnum of Archaea, but here it is a phylum within regnum Archaebacteria.

See also my related (but different) query at Talk:Euryarchaeota.

I am unwilling to make major changes of this kind here myself as I am not an expert in this field of fundamental taxonomy. However I would think the related group of Wikispecies pages about these taxa need to be consistent with each other, whatever the current state of the actual science.

Iph 21:16, 26 May 2007 (UTC)iph[reply]