Talk:Taxonomy of the Gastropoda (Ponder & Lindberg, 1997)

Gastropods Mid‑importance

	Gastropods portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Gastropods, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of gastropods 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.GastropodsWikipedia:WikiProject GastropodsTemplate:WikiProject GastropodsGastropods articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
Taxonomy: For all marine species, Project Gastropods uses the taxonomy in the online database WoRMS. When starting a new article, do not use sources of taxonomic information that predate the 2017 revision for all gastropod groups ("Revised Classification, Nomenclator and Typification of Gastropod and Monoplacophoran Families" by Philippe Bouchet & Jean-Pierre Rocroi, Bernhard Hausdorf, Andrzej Kaim, Yasunori Kano, Alexander Nützel, Pavel Parkhaev, Michael Schrödl and Ellen E. Strong in Malacologia, 2017, 61(1–2): 1–526.) (can be dowloaded at Researchgate.net), substituting the previous classification of 2005 Taxonomy of the Gastropoda (Bouchet & Rocroi, 2005). If you need help with any aspect of an article, please leave a note at the Project talk page.

Gastropoda subclass: Apogastropoda

Latest comment: 14 years ago4 comments4 people in discussion

Should Apogastropoda be listed as a subclass of Gastropoda? Gastropoda articles claims only four subclasses [1]. Are there five or more? I know nothing about this. I just made the Apogastropoda article because there was high demand for it. Please advise. Thanks.

I have posted this at...
Talk:Taxonomy of the Gastropoda (Bouchet & Rocroi, 2005)
Talk:Taxonomy of the Gastropoda (Ponder & Lindberg, 1997)
Talk:Gastropoda--Anna Frodesiak (talk) 03:49, 26 February 2009 (UTC)Reply

Reply : see Talk:Taxonomy of the Gastropoda (Bouchet & Rocroi, 2005) JoJan (talk) 16:13, 26 February 2009 (UTC)Reply

This article does not correctly reflect the paper of Ponder & Lindberg (1997). They do not use Linnean ranks for their groups. The assignment of Linnean ranks to the groups treated by Ponder & Lindberg is pure speculation. -- Engeser (talk) 18:50, 4 February 2010 (UTC)Reply

Yes, you are right. I tried to quickly correct it like this: [2]. --Snek01 (talk) 20:57, 4 February 2010 (UTC)Reply

Add topic