Talk:Pecopteris

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Earth sciences Portal
Pecopteris is part of WikiProject Geology, an attempt at creating a standardized, informative, comprehensive and easy-to-use geology resource. If you would like to participate, you can choose to edit this article, or visit the project page for more information.
Stub This article has been rated as Stub-class on the quality scale.
Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the importance scale.
Pecopteris is within the scope of WikiProject Plants, an attempt to better organize information in articles related to plants and botany. For more information, visit the project page.
Stub This article has been rated as Stub-class on the quality scale.
Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the importance scale.

Contents

[edit] Pecopteris species names

Does anybody know of a list of the species names for Pecopteris? So far, I have only learned of Pecopteris miltoni. Does anyone have a more current source for the amount of Pecopteris species identified? I am sure more have been discovored since 1997. Thanks! --Pecopteris (talk) 16:33, 3 May 2008 (UTC) P.S.- As you can see, I found a list online of several species names for Pecopteris, and I am still searching!--Pecopteris (talk) 16:44, 5 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] List of Pecopteris species names

Here is a list of the species names for Pecopteris. If you know of another species, please add it to the list in alphabetical order. Thanks!--Pecopteris (talk) 23:25, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

  • Pecopteris arborescens
  • Pecopteris arguta
  • Pecopteris bucklandi
  • Pecopteris dontata
  • Pecopteris hemiteliodes
  • Pecopteris mazoniana
  • Pecopteris milfordi
  • Pecopteris miltoni
  • Pecopteris polymorpha
  • Pecopteris serpillifolia
  • Pecopteris unita
  • Pecopteris vestita
  • Pecopteris villosa

[edit] Clean up

Hi, Pecopteris! As I noted, I would explain my edit here. I removed the quote from the geocraft site. That website doesn't appear to be authoritative. Try searching the primary literature. I have access to some journals and I briefly looked over the search results, but I'm not well-versed in fossil taxonomy and I apparently lack the appropriate vocabulary necessary to understand those articles! If you'd like, I can forward them to you. In order to use inline citations, you can use the <ref> tags, explained here: WP:CITE. Further, I removed the links to the photos. While instructive, we tend to prefer the inclusion of public domain images uploaded to Wikipedia instead of following links to other websites. Hope that helps! --Rkitko (talk) 22:40, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

Oh, and I just included Marattiales as the order becuase I saw it listed as such in a relatively recent article. Is this still correct? I know very little about fossil fern taxonomy and wondered how stable it is. --Rkitko (talk) 22:41, 6 May 2008 (UTC)
One more thing! Generally, it's not good to redirect species names to the genus. Allow the species pages to remain as red links so that their pages can be developed. --Rkitko (talk) 22:43, 6 May 2008 (UTC)
Ah, thank you very much! I am still quite new here :).--Pecopteris (talk) 11:07, 7 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Taxonomy

This "genus" is a form taxon for fossils of a particular leaf morphology, and should not have a taxobox. According to Taylor & Taylor, Pecopteris foliage was borne by several unrelated plant groups, including Marattialean ferns, leptosporangiate ferns, and even some seed plants. --EncycloPetey (talk) 16:43, 11 May 2008 (UTC).

Thanks for clearing that up! I kept seeing mixed information in the literature and it wasn't very clear at all (at least to me). Thanks again! --Rkitko (talk) 16:52, 11 May 2008 (UTC)
Thanks again!--Pecopteris (talk) 22:41, 11 May 2008 (UTC)
De nada. I've uploaded to Commons an image I took of P. villosa and included it on the page. I also put in a link to the appropriate category of images on Commons. --EncycloPetey (talk) 23:02, 11 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Etymology

Thanks a lot for correcting the Etymology!--Pecopteris (talk) 12:59, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

No sweat; I'm a regular on Wiktionary. --EncycloPetey (talk) 13:56, 16 May 2008 (UTC)
As you can see from the main article, I use Webster's Dictionary. I slightly misread one of my copies, and I made that error. Wiktionary sounds interesting. Is it similar to Wikipedia?--Pecopteris (talk) 17:22, 18 May 2008 (UTC)
Yes and no. Each Wiktionary is multiplingual, so the English Wiktionary covers all words in all languages, but explains each word only in English. Also, format at data structure are far more important than they are here. As a result of this and different goals, the policies also differ in a number of respects. --EncycloPetey (talk) 02:03, 19 May 2008 (UTC)