From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

	Cnidaria is within the scope of WikiProject Animals, an attempt to better organize information in articles related to animals and zoology. For more information, visit the project page.	Animals Portal
Start	This article has been rated as Start-class on the quality scale.
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the importance scale.
WikiProject Animals To-do: edit Here are some Open Tasks : Copyedit: Improve: Animal, Zoology, Invertebrate, Vertebrate, Ethology, Photoperiodism, Tool use by animals, Omnivore Requests: Caminalcules Mammals: Grizzlar Bear, Jarkov Mammoth, Townsend's big-eared baty Invertebrates: Shingle urchin, Velvet mite, Fingernail clam Fishes: Pike eel, Spotted sucker, Berycidae, Trichonotidae Amphibians: Cave salamander, Nightfrog Stubs: Stud, Candling, Crawling, Growling, Hatchling, Litter, Crossbreed, Pack hunter, Personal grooming, Protobird, Spoor, Territorial marking, Worming Nominate and vote: Science collaboration of the month, Article Improvement Drive, WikiProject Animals Collaboration

To-do list for Cnidaria:	edit · history · watch · refresh
Here are some tasks you can do: Expand: Morphology and anatomy
Priority 2

Contents 1 Reagan link 2 Classification in the taxobox and the body of the test 3 Vandalism 3.1 Headline text 3.2 Manus 3.3 References

[edit] Reagan link

The Reagan era link leads to a disambiguation that discusses only the surname Reagan. Does an appropriate article for the biological era exist, or is this entire sentence vandalism?

[edit] Classification in the taxobox and the body of the test

I've played around with trying to clarify the classification of subphyla and classes. I also added links to the source for the classification I used in the taxobox. The problem, of course, is that there are alternative classification schemes. As I am not a worker in the field, I have no feel for what best represents the current state of knowledge. I do feel however, that whatever classification scheme is used in the taxobox should be tied to a source. So, any dissenters to what I've done? -- Donald Albury 12:13, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Vandalism

some one is vandalising the page repeatedly!!Silverpal 16:25, 21 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Headline text

they allhave stinging cells. more complex than sponges —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.168.221.157 (talk) 22:56, 29 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Manus

The basic body shape of a cnidarian consists of a sac containing a gastrovascular cavity with a single opening that functions as both mouth and anus known as a manus.

I've looked for this term elsewhere and have found no reference to it. It is not used in any invertebrate zoology texts that I've found. Vandalism? --JimmyButler (talk) 15:05, 13 May 2008 (UTC) Corrected ... wow this page is heavily vandalized with very immature edits. Guess it's those school kids doing projects in biology classes.--JimmyButler (talk) 15:20, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] References

The reference section is not actually considered "references" if they are not sourced within the document. Other than "additional reading" it serves no purpose. Adding a list of stately resources at the end and calling them references does not contribute to the confidence level or the accuracy of the document unless you can determine "what" and "where". That said, several of the references upon, reading, had excellent information that could be included and cited in the article.

I recommend renaming the reference section to Additional Resources or some such nonsense and merging the journal section with it. Then rename the Notes section to "references" which actually have embedded links between the document and the referenced source. Then going through and actually citing the information.

In reality the very long "reading list" should be edited down to those most relevant or useful and the others deleted. People come to Wikipedia for the answer --- not as a hub for an infinite number of links elsewhere.

If no one is opposed, I might dork around with it. I picked up a few skills while being beat up over the Introduction to Evolution FA concerning citations formatting and encyclopedic prose that can help a little here. I'll proceed with care .... don't want to be a Manus about it.--JimmyButler (talk) 01:07, 24 May 2008 (UTC)