Talk:Aurelia (cnidarian)

Merger proposal

I've proposed merging Aurelia aurita to this article. As the Aurelia aurita article indicates, nearly anything that can be said about A. aurita applies to the genus as a whole, and indeed differentiation of species within this genus is difficult. Anything that does apply specifically to A. aurita can go in its own section. Thoughts? Dohn joe (talk) 22:16, 12 November 2010 (UTC)

• Unsure I think they probably be kept separate, as this article states "There are at least 13 species in the genus Aurelia including many that are still not formally described". To write about the genus as a whole based only on A aurita would not be correct in my opinion. That said, I get your point that much of what is in the A. aurita article applies to the genus, but this is probably best dealt with by using sources in the A. aurita article in the genus article. SmartSE (talk) 22:29, 12 November 2010 (UTC)

• Oppose. If this article is mostly about a single species, then the specific information should be moved into the other article and the generic information retained here. Bob the Wikipedian ^{(talk • contribs)} 02:25, 13 November 2010 (UTC)