Linnaen_taxonomy|Talk

Authors include [[Josh Grosse]] and [[Andy Jewell]]

Links should be "[[Kingdom Animalia]]" rather than "Kingdom [[Animalia]]"

We need an easy english example by every entry.

[[Prokaryotae]] - you say that this is a new form of [[Monera]] but I don't think that a majority has made the switch.  There doesn't seem to be any reason to, and historically such names have tended to be ignored, at least (Protoctista, Chlorophycophyta, etc).  A lot of workers tend to neglect the name altogether, since it seems to be polyphyletic.  Any reason for choosing this form?

[[Protista]] - the classification of protista has been changing a lot recently, and I think most people have more or less abandoned higher level Linnaean stuff for the time being.  [[Euglenids]] have variously been grouped as a phylum or class and referred to as the Euglenida, Euglenophyta, Euglenophyceae, etc.  Some of the groups you mention have been dropped entirely, especially the amoeboid ones, due to heavy polyphyly, and I'd been leaving those off and grouping by rough grades (flagellates, amoeboids, algae, etc).  I would love to hear if you have any good ideas on what to do, since the flat list seems wrong and what I was doing seems clunky.

[[Chordata]] - the current classification is awful and everybody hates it.  The Agnatha, Osteichthyes, Amphibia, and Reptilia are all paraphyletic, and extinct forms are really hard to handle in them.  They're standard, so we should mention them, but wikipedia doesn't have to organize itself on an obsolete and broken system if we don't want it to.

Misc terms - aren't phyla of plants normally referred to as ''divisions''?  Also, Hominidae has been used in two senses recently: as the family containing ''Homo'' and as the lone family of Hominoidae (humans and apes).  The former is what Linnaeus did, but he himself said he wished he'd done the latter and there's been some effort to change.