Talk:Ceramium nodulosum

Marine life Low‑importance

This article is part of WikiProject Marine life, an attempt at creating a standardized, informative, comprehensive and easy-to-use resource on marine life. If you would like to participate, you can choose to edit this article, or visit the project page where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion. This project is an offshoot of the WikiProject Tree of Life.Marine lifeWikipedia:WikiProject Marine lifeTemplate:WikiProject Marine lifeMarine life articles

Low

This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Marine life To do:

Have a look at the Marine life WikiProject and sign up.

Here are some tasks you can do, as organized by The Marine life Wikiproject:

Collaboration of the week: Marine life article assessment
Other: See the projects page
Images: Upload any non-copyrighted marine life images to Wikimedia Commons
Featured Articles/Good Articles:
Other: Add {{Portal|Marine life}} to related articles

Algae Low‑importance

	This article is part of WikiProject Algae, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of the photosynthetic organisms commonly called algae and related topics. If you would like to participate, visit the project page.AlgaeWikipedia:WikiProject AlgaeTemplate:WikiProject AlgaeAlgae articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

{{HELPME}} Ceramium nodulosum- reference? Please help! what is wrong with this reference? "Parameter". Osborne 20:00, 22 December 2017 (UTC)

The problem is that the ISBN you entered for the print reference is invalid, if you'd read the whole error. —Jeremy v^_^v ^Bori! 21:42, 22 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Ceramium nodulosum

This help request has been answered. If you need more help, you can ask another question on your talk page, contact the responding user(s) directly on their user talk page, or consider visiting the Teahouse.

The species Ceramium nodulosum (Lightfoot) Ducluzeau and Ceramium virgatum Roth are noted as in confusion, they may be synonyms. I am considering using the two references and the two names is the description of the one species in the one article on the one species! Will be grateful for advice - is this wise or how best express the problem!Osborne 20:57, 12 February 2018 (UTC)

I'm not quite sure I can tell what "noted as in confusion" means. They may be synonymous? But maybe they're different species, that's also possible? If scientists cannot agree whether the species are one and the same, I'd say it's better to have separate articles, with information on one species only in the article for that one species (of course those articles should mention that there is an opinion that the two species are the same). If, on the other hand, the names definitely are synonymous and both refer to the same species, we should have only one article under the more common name, with the other name a redirect to that page. Huon (talk) 22:43, 12 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]