Talk:Pseudomonadota

I'm not sure if renaming the article to Pseudomonadota is an appropriate choice yet. Whilst this is the name officially recognised by the ICSP, the change is very recent, and the standard for most Wikipedia articles is to use the typical, common name for organisms. Proteobacteria is the name you will find in every textbook and general interest article, while a Google Scholar search for 'Pseudomonadota' returns a total of ten results; one of which is a comment from Nature Reviews Microbiology criticising the ICSP for the superfluous renaming. Significantly, tens of thousands of academic articles written after the change still use Proteobacteria.

If, in the future, the microbiology community accepts the ICSP change and this comes into general usage, the Wiki article should be changed. For as long as the renaming is ignored by most professionals, though, I think it's sufficient to mention this somewhere on the Proteobacteria page.Kaficek (talk) 19:14, 13 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with this objection. As a professor, I consider these new names to be anti-inclusion. They erect shibboleths that make the new-coming student feel inferior. Pseudomonadota is a particularly egregious example. It is barely pronounceable, and its meaning and history are opaque. "Proteobacterota" might be a reasonable compromise. The concept of "protean" bacteria helps students recall that this widely studied taxon encompasses diverse metatolisms and functions. The proposed new name is a setback to learning and inclusion. Slonczewski (talk) 22:01, 30 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I also agree with this. It's a frequent frustration I hear among other microbiologists that a small number of taxonomists make large changes without consulting the people those changes will effect on a day-to-day basis. Automatically changing the name of this and the other affected phyla generates a false consensus on what the vast majority of people in the field actually refer to things as. Additionally, unlike taxonomic changes that are based on some specific scientific reason (ie. splitting polyphyletic groups), this change was done mostly for aesthetic reasons. Formallydehyde (talk) 02:54, 7 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

On 18 March 2022, it was proposed that this article be moved to Proteobacteria. The result of the discussion was not moved.

Requested move 18 March 2022[edit]

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: Not Moved Mike Cline (talk) 12:21, 28 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Pseudomonadota → Proteobacteria – Proteobacteria was renamed Pseudomonadota by the International Committee on Systematics of Prokaryotes only in October 2021. Whilst ICSP is the relevant authority, the standard naming convention for articles about organisms in Wikipedia uses the common name. A Google Scholar search for Pseudomonadota returns, at the time I write this comment, only 12 results, one of which is the article publishing the new name and one of which is a comment criticising the decision. By contrast, a search for Proteobacteria returns 4,630 results published in 2022. Regardless of the official name for the clade, Preoteobacteria clearly remains the most commonly used name by an enormous margin, and should remain the primary name for the Wikipedia article until that changes (as it seems to on every other language Wikipedia. Kaficek (talk) 21:38, 18 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose: LPSN lists Pseudomonadota as the correct name. As an encyclopedia, we should aim to be technically correct in areas like this. It's not like the man on man on the Clapham omnibus will have a strong opinion on this, which means I don't think WP:COMMONNAME is particulary relevant. YorkshireExpat (talk) 12:04, 19 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose - the new name is the new name. Just because not everyone has switched over yet doesn’t make the current name invalid. Moving it back will just triple the work. This isn’t TOOSOON. --awkwafaba (📥) 14:29, 19 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Awkwafaba: Whoops, I completely misread 😳. I have changed my vote. YorkshireExpat (talk) 15:41, 19 March 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.

Change name back to Proteobacteria[edit]

I strongly support the objection to the new page name and urge return to the name Proteobacteria. As a professor, and an author of a major textbook on microbiology, I consider this name and some of the other new ICSP proposed names to be anti-inclusion. They erect shibboleths that make the new student feel inferior. Pseudomonadota is a particularly egregious example. It is barely pronounceable, and its meaning and history are opaque. "Proteobacterota" might be a reasonable compromise. The concept of "protean" bacteria helps students recall that this widely studied taxon encompasses diverse metabolisms and functions. The proposed new name is a setback to learning and inclusion.

It is not true that these new names are absolutely accepted. As the ICSP writes, these names are only "proposed" and "the community still decides which [names] to adopt." As a member of the microbiology community I am maintaining the historical name of the phylum Proteobacteria. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Slonczewski (talk • contribs) 13:20, 1 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Change of page name[edit]

Requested move 24 November 2023[edit]

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: not moved. (closed by non-admin page mover) Bensci54 (talk) 17:11, 1 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Pseudomonadota → Proteobacteria – It is the common name - Google hits nearly 9 million versus 278K for Pseudomonadota and does not register on nGrams. Also consensus already seems to exist on talk page. Iztwoz (talk) 10:22, 24 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose: LPSN lists Proteobacteria as a junior synonym of Pseudomonadota. It is well established practice that junior synonyms should not be used as article title. The fact that Pseudomonadota was only listed in 2021 is probably why you are seeing so many more hits for Proteobacteria. YorkshireExpat (talk) 17:09, 24 November 2023 (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.

Wiki Education assignment: EEB 4611-Biogeochemical Processes-Spring 2024[edit]

This article is currently the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 16 January 2024 and 2 May 2024. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Kloth017, Finle170 (article contribs).

— Assignment last updated by Finle170 (talk) 15:51, 28 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]