Talk:Cladoselache

Merge discussion
Note: The following was copied from WikiProject Palaeontology on 1 November 2014. --Animalparty-- (talk) 19:45, 1 November 2014 (UTC) Proposal of merging the article concerning Cladoselache with Cladoselachidae

Hi, I do advocate convenience in the allocations of information, yet wouldn't support the merging of two pages, which do concern similar topics, yet regard two distinct taxonomic ranks. Now, one might say that such a standpoint is not tenable, due to the one page concerning a genus, and the other the family to which it belongs, but they are still two distinct taxonomic ranks and therefore merging the two would infer an insignificance of lower rank. --GaryGLouw 16:53, 1 November 2014 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by GaryLouw19 (talk • contribs)
 * This discussion belongs on the talk page of one of the two articles in question, but the convention is to merge monotypic taxa. Since the family apparently contains mutiple genera, it would be best to have the family article present an overview of all genera, (shared features, temporal occurrence, etc), yielding to genera articles for specific details. --Animalparty-- (talk) 17:42, 1 November 2014 (UTC)
 * As mentioned above, merging should only be done when the family/subfamily/etc. taxon is monotypic. This one isn't. In fact, the opposite has to be done; creation of articles for the red linked genera. FunkMonk (talk) 17:46, 1 November 2014 (UTC)

The merge template was apparently added here by User:Panderichthys4144, with no comment, and the user account has since been blocked. I think we can effectively end the discussion as consensus to not merge. agreed?--Animalparty-- (talk) 19:55, 1 November 2014 (UTC)
 * Merge tags removed. --Animalparty-- (talk) 18:53, 4 February 2015 (UTC)