Talk:Honey possum

Mammals: Monotremes and Marsupials Low‑importance

	Mammals portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Mammals, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of mammal-related subjects 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.MammalsWikipedia:WikiProject MammalsTemplate:WikiProject Mammalsmammal articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Monotremes and Marsupials (assessed as Low-importance).

Australia: Western Australia / Biota Low‑importance

	Australia portal Honey possum is within the scope of WikiProject Australia, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of Australia and Australia-related topics. If you would like to participate, visit the project page.AustraliaWikipedia:WikiProject AustraliaTemplate:WikiProject AustraliaAustralia articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Western Australia (assessed as Low-importance).
	This article is supported by WikiProject Australian biota (assessed as Low-importance).
	Need help improving this article? Ask a Librarian^{What's this?} at the National Library of Australia, or the State Library of Western Australia.
	The Wikimedia Australia chapter can be contacted via email to helpwikimedia.org.au for non-editorial assistance.

On Mutant Planet

Latest comment: 13 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

On the TV series Mutant Planet it described them as having the smallest young (5 mg) and the largest sperm cells (larger than a human's; forget the size). I'm not sure how to cite sources on TV, though. :-/ --HoopoeBaijiKite 03:42, 27 April 2011 (UTC)Reply

Moving questionable paragraph from article to here

Latest comment: 7 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

I'm moving the paragraph below to this page. In some form, it has been here since 4 May 2003. Not only is it unreferenced, I can't find any current science to back it up. On the other hand, the latest cladistic analysis suggests that there may be something like what the paragraph says, based on mtDNA. It's just that the evidence isn't strong enough to overturn current phylogeny.

Many authorities^[who?] believe it is sufficiently distinct to be more properly raised to a separate superfamily within the Diprotodontia, or perhaps even further. It is thought to be the sole survivor of an otherwise long-extinct marsupial group.^{[citation needed]}

Zyxwv99 (talk) 19:10, 21 May 2017 (UTC)Reply

Add topic