Talk:Calonectria pteridis

Fungi Low‑importance

	Fungi portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Fungi, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Fungi 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.FungiWikipedia:WikiProject FungiTemplate:WikiProject FungiFungi articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	An editor has requested that an image or photograph be added to this article.

On 4 February 2022, it was proposed that this article be moved from Cylindrocladium pteridis to Calonectria ptederis. The result of the discussion was moved.

Requested move 4 February 2022

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: moved. (closed by non-admin page mover) Extraordinary Writ (talk) 04:33, 12 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Cylindrocladium pteridis → Calonectria ptederis – "Cylindrocladium ptederis" is the outdated name. The correct and updated name is Calonectria ptederis. I believe the page should be moved to Calonectria ptederis, and the current title should redirect to the page. --192.68.163.182 (talk) 14:38, 4 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Support "Calonectria pteridis", see Calonectria pteridis in MycoBank. YorkshireExpat (talk) 08:49, 5 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support, the current title should be changed to redirect to Calonectria pteridis. I did notice though that you wrote "ptederis" instead of pteridis. Simple mistake, I'm assuming. --APGL07 (talk) 04:07, 6 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@APGL07: right! I must have copied/pasted from here! I will edit my support comment. Will probably have to be redone. YorkshireExpat (talk) 17:18, 6 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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.