Talk:Eleutherozoa

merge with Stelleroidea

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section. A summary of the conclusions reached follows.

Merger not completed. The class Stelleroidea belongs to the subphylum Eleutherozoa ([1]). They are two different things. WTF? (talk) 15:59, 10 February 2013 (UTC)

---

I've put in a modern phylogeny but am not confident enough with its foibles to update the article more fully, so I've left the article as it is (i.e. self-contradictory). Hope someone more familiar with the topic can update it! Verisimilus T 16:24, 2 February 2008 (UTC)

I see no advantage in merging these two articles. Stelleroidea seems to be an order within the subphylum Eleutherozoa and deserves a separate page. The cladistics are unclear and subject to change and the present structure is as good as any other. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 05:20, 30 September 2011 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Temporal range inconsistency

I could be mistaken, but I think the temporal range of this taxon is incorrect. It is stated in this article’s automatic taxobox to have Cambrian origins, but none of the classes within it have existed earlier than the Ordovician. What I suspect may have happened is that the temporal range was copied from the higher classification Echinodermata, but as far as I’m aware, this is in error as Crinoidea is not included within Eleutherozoa—while Crinoids certainly do have Cambrian origins, they are excluded from this taxon. The classes Asteroidea, Echinoidea, Holothuroidea, Ophiuroidea, and Somasteroidea, which are included, all come later geologically. Entelognathus (talk) 17:54, 14 March 2021 (UTC)