Talk:Pinniped: Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added

Inline

Revision as of 02:26, 28 December 2007

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Tree of Life, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of taxonomy and the phylogenetic tree of life on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Tree of LifeWikipedia:WikiProject Tree of LifeTemplate:WikiProject Tree of Lifetaxonomic articles
B	This article has been rated as B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Template:FAOL According to the this article Odobenidae is a subfamily of Pinnipedia while Walrus claims that Odobenidae is a family. Which is true? --EnSamulili 16:18, 7 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Both are true, depending on what classification scheme one follows. Newer systems (cladistics) tend to deemphasize the old heirarchy of divisions in favor of clades, which are composed of all descendants of a common ancestor. Tom Radulovich 03:22, 8 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Thank you for your answer. Which classification is cladistic and which is older style? --EnSamulili 10:44, 10 Apr 2005 (UTC)

There was new classification of the Pinnipides. I think that for such a change, a source would be necessary. -EnSamulili 20:02, 30 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Evolutionary origin

Is there any information on what seals evolved from?

The German Wikipedia has info on that: w:de:Robben#Stammesgeschichte. Unfortunately I can't read German quite well enough to answer your question. -EnSamulili 17:43, 6 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

The pinnipeds are related to bears, according to my source (which is added to the article) DaMatriX 22:28, 18 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

This article is biased. You evolutionists print it like its a fact. What ever happened to " in the beginning God created the Heavens and the earth. Evolution is not a science, its a belief. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.138.88.239 (talk) 15:42, 17 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hybrids

This information would be more appropriate in the relevant species pages, doesnt seem particularly significant for the order as a whole. Should be removed if there are no objections --Parslad 19:11, 12 May 2006 (UTC)][reply]

I agree DaMatriX 22:31, 19 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Evolution section

The current evolution section is a total disaster. Which is it - "Latest Oligocene", "early in the Oligocene", or "earliest Miocene"? The language is quite unprofessional, and what on Earth do wolves have to do with anything? Can somebody please clean up this mess? I could try, but I would rather that somebody who knows more about early pinnipeds do it, and who could add references for the information.

Actually, I can't stand it as it is, so I will do a little cleanup right now. But somebody knowledgeable in the area please go over it again. --mglg_(talk) 20:57, 7 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Is it possible to have a seperate page dealing with their evolution, as in the Evolution of sirenians, horses and humans? Enlil Ninlil 05:37, 12 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Implications of Enaliarctos for the origins of pinnipeds

Add the below reference to this page:

Berta, A., C.E. Ray and A.R. Wyss. 1989. Skeleton of the oldest known pinniped, Enaliarctos mealsi. Science, 244:60-62.

Berta, Ray, and Wyss (1989) describe the skeleton of Enaliarctos, and list the characters of Enaliarctos that support a monophyletic Pinnipedia. The authors view this fossil as supporting a North Pacific origin for pinnipeds. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 72.194.116.63 (talk) 15:03, 9 February 2007 (UTC).[reply]

@@ Line 1: / Line 1: @@
 {{TOL|class=B|importance=}}
+{{FAOL|German|de:Robben}}
 According to the this article ''Odobenidae'' is a subfamily of ''Pinnipedia'' while [[Walrus]] claims that ''Odobenidae'' is a family. Which is true? --[[User:EnSamulili|EnSamulili]] 16:18, 7 Apr 2005 (UTC)