Talk:Vologdinella

Comment
Can someone quote a reference about the taxonomy of this organism? The literature still seems to call it a cephalopod. --Kleopatra (talk) 16:22, 5 November 2010 (UTC)
 * The reference in the article doesn't... I've only had the chance to skim 10.1080/00241160310001254 but that also looks relevant.  Martin  (Smith609 – Talk)  16:43, 5 November 2010 (UTC)
 * That's a bum link. --Kleopatra (talk) 03:59, 6 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Try this one: Martin  (Smith609 – Talk)  20:17, 6 November 2010 (UTC)
 * What does this article say about Vologdinella? I don't have access, and the article appears to be about animals, not algae, so why would it have the alga's taxonomy? --Kleopatra (talk) 20:34, 6 November 2010 (UTC)
 * I can e-mail you a copy of the PDF if you like, get in touch via Special:EmailUser. Volborthella has traditionally been aligned with Vologdinella (apparently).  Martin  (Smith609 – Talk)  20:38, 6 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Yes, it has been, and it still is in many sources, but usually when an organism is removed in the midst of describing another organism, the removal does not necessarily get a full taxonomic treatment. This article has a detailed taxobox. I would like a copy of the article that includes this organism's taxonomy. I have e-mail activated. --Kleopatra (talk) 20:44, 6 November 2010 (UTC)

Are there two Vologdinellas?
After squeezing water out of the google stone for a few hours just to add more information about Vologdinella Balashov, 1962 (the genus being described here), I eventually found there's also an algae genus Vologdinella Korde, 1957 (or K. B. Korde ) apparently. (see and ) That said, that latter genus could be a synonym of a Proaulophora Vologdin, 1937 according to  (a later page has both authorities: ).

But anyway, I suspect this could be the reason for the uncited alga designation (amongst other confusion here), which is why I bring this up. Maybe someone got them mixed up somehow? I dunno exactly.

(While we're at it, I think I found the species that goes in the Balashov 1962 genus, a V. antiqua (Vologdin, 1931) (originally from Orthoceras) according to . But I've found nothing further that supports this for now, so I've refrained adding it for now.)

Hope this helps fixing this mess? Monster Iestyn (talk) 22:02, 21 March 2018 (UTC)


 * Just found another page supporting V. antiqua (as well as a "Vologdinellidae" family) ; I think this is probably taken from Treatise on Invertebrate Paleontology part K? Monster Iestyn (talk) 22:26, 21 March 2018 (UTC)


 * There are certainly two Vologdinellas. Vologdinella Balasho, 1962 is not a cephalopod, but it is an animal. Vologdinella Korde, 1957 is also not a cephalopod, but it's not an animal at all. Since both genera have been intertwined from the inception of the article, you could go any direction with it. Make it about the animal? Make it about the algae? Make a disambiguation page and articles for both genera? Plantdrew (talk) 03:39, 22 March 2018 (UTC)


 * Right now I'm leaning towards keeping this article about the Balashov genus, because of Korde's apparently being a synonym going by what I linked earlier. Only thing is, google literally comes up with nothing when trying to search "Proaulophora", so I can't quickly check if that is still a valid genus name or not. (Which is weird considering it works when searching it in one of the google books I linked)


 * You can probably tell a lot of my work depends on being able to google it. =) Monster Iestyn (talk) 05:05, 22 March 2018 (UTC)


 * There, I've made it about the animal genus. I'll fiddle about with the taxobox templates later when I have time (if someone else doesn't do that for me). Monster Iestyn (talk) 23:17, 22 March 2018 (UTC)