User:LightningThrower/articles/Loricifera

Articles by Rating

Rating : C

• Armorloricus elegans
• Armorloricus davidi
• Armorloricus kristenseni
• Scaberiloricus

Rating : Start

• Culexiregiloricus
• Fafnirloricus
• Scutiloricus
• Nanaloricus mysticus
• Wataloricus
• Patuloricus
• Rugiloricus manuelae
• Incertae sedis (Loricifera)

Rating : List

• List of Loricifera species

Future Articles

• Urnaloricus ibenae
• Spinoloricus neuhausi
• Spinoloricus turbatio

Results

This project led to 12 articles and 1 list.

• 4 C-rated articles
• 8 Start-rated articles

I have stopped attempting to do the Future Articles. I tried doing Urnaloricus ibenae and ended up writing an article on the wrong species > Rugiloricus manuelae. I couldn't find the publication.

Notes

This project is pretty much done.

I'm not expecting to create articles above B, at least on this topic. It's probably possible for all of them though, but it would take quite a while.

When you look into it, I think these scientists could have some more recognition. Reinhardt Mobjerg Kristensen and Gunnar Gad were the two big ones pretty much. I've Shinta Fujimoto's work in WoRMS, doing other species in the phylum. Sørensen, Neves, and Higgins are some other names that show up multiple times.

I have chosen the Future Articles the way I did because those would complete their genera with few articles (less time).

After this, I may expand on genera articles, family articles, and order articles. (Nanaloricidae and Nanaloricida are both simply redirects to Loricifera?!?!?)

As for the genera Nanaloricus, Pliciloricus, and Rugiloricus, I'm not too sure as of now whether I will do their species. They have many, many species, for instance, Pliciloricus alone has almost as many species as I have done so far. It would appear that Tenuiloricus has been made by User:Smith609, who makes many short articles on species and genera. Just thought that was pretty interesting. They have made over 1,000 articles total, but it looks like they are nearing Wikiretirement.

The goal is probably for any of these scientists to look up a species they found or helped find and see that there is a Wikipedia article on it.

From what I can tell, there seems to be some friendship or camaraderie amongst these scientists. They often collaborate and almost always cite each others' works (although this is also probably out of necessity).

I mean, just look at this:

• Species Pliciloricus ukupachaensis Sørensen, Herranz, Grzelak, Shimabukuro, Kristensen & Zeppilli, 2023

That is six people. I don't think this is purely for efficiency, maybe a little bit of accuracy is gained from this, but I think it may also motivate them and make them more excited or curious. Just theories and speculation.

Also, something notable is that I have seen small statements in their publications that reveal that at least one of them is aware that another scientist is/was working on a publication which wasn't published at the time.

Thanks for reading this.

Revival?

It is August 2026 and I just made some articles on this again. Not species, but higher levels, and not in depth, just summaries.

• Nanaloricidae