Talk:Tribrachidium

Untitled

Compare the old stub with this page: http://www.ucmp.berkeley.edu/vendian/tribrach.html

As you can see, the text is the same, so I'm assuming a copyright violation. I was rewriting the article anyway so as to de-stubify it, so when I saw this I just changed to re-writing from scratch.

Short as the new article is, I removed the stub message at the bottom. We really don't know very much about these critters, so this is about all there is to say about them. Paul Drye 18:44, 2 February 2006 (UTC)

Jellyfish?

Is it really a fact that these things were cnidaria? I thought there was a great deal of discussion as to where to place them... Verisimilus 18:21, 10 March 2007 (UTC)

That's the conclusion Ivantsov and Fedonkin came to when they were studying Vendiaconularia, which was a cnidarian that had 6-fold radial symmetry.--Mr Fink 19:19, 10 March 2007 (UTC)

I'm pretty sure Vendiaconularia does not have a confirmed, settled classification either. 2601:441:4900:A6E0:1003:D7C4:E460:35E2 (talk) 00:29, 10 July 2022 (UTC)

new image

I suppose this image here File:Tribrachidium_heraldicum_トリブラキディウム_ヘラルディキウム_24mm.jpg could replace the old image because it has more of a closeup of a fossil specimen. Rugoconites Tenuirugosus (talk) 16:02, 18 April 2022 (UTC)User:Rugoconites_Tenuirugosus

Personally, I would prefer not to use this photo, because this sample has an illegal origin. It was illegally mined and exported from Russia by "black" fossil dealers. The Ediacaran fossil market is completely criminal. Aleksey (Alnagov (talk) 16:52, 18 April 2022 (UTC))

I agree that Wikipedia isn't the place to use or post pictures of poached fossils.--Mr Fink (talk) 20:23, 21 April 2022 (UTC)

Why hasn't the picture been taken down yet? there are pictures similar to it that are still up on Wikipedia as a whole and only learned they're poached and illegally obtained specimens from your response. Rugoconites Tenuirugosus (talk) 20:44, 15 January 2023 (UTC)