Talk:Picozoa

Protista Mid‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Protista, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of protists and protistology 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.ProtistaWikipedia:WikiProject ProtistaTemplate:WikiProject ProtistaProtista
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Microbiology Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Microbiology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Microbiology 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.MicrobiologyWikipedia:WikiProject MicrobiologyTemplate:WikiProject MicrobiologyMicrobiology
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Marine life (inactive)

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Marine life, a project which is currently considered to be inactive.Marine lifeWikipedia:WikiProject Marine lifeTemplate:WikiProject Marine lifeMarine life

Limnology and Oceanography Low‑importance

	Oceans portal This article is part of the WikiProject Limnology and Oceanography to improve Wikipedia's coverage of the inland waters and marine environments. The aim is to write neutral and well-referenced articles on limnology- or oceanography-related topics, as well as to ensure that limnology and oceanography articles are properly categorized. Read Wikipedia:Contributing FAQ and leave any messages at the project talk page.Limnology and OceanographyWikipedia:WikiProject Limnology and OceanographyTemplate:WikiProject Limnology and OceanographyLimnology and Oceanography
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Archives

Talk:Picobiliphyte

Requested move 1 June 2025

It has been proposed in this section that Picozoa be renamed and moved to Picomonas.

A bot will list this discussion on the requested moves current discussions subpage within an hour of this tag being placed. The discussion may be closed 7 days after being opened, if consensus has been reached (see the closing instructions). Please base arguments on article title policy, and keep discussion succinct and civil.

Please use {{subst:requested move}}. Do not use {{requested move/dated}} directly.

Links: current log • target log • direct move

Picozoa → Picomonas – See Wikipedia:WikiProject Protista#Article title Jako96 (talk) 10:46, 1 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose. These are WikiProject recommendations that have not been adopted as an official naming convention, policy, or guideline. The article is a bit confusing and I may be missing something here. Is it the case that only one species has been named–Picomonas judraskeda–but it is understood that other species do belong to this genus? If we treat it as a monotypic genus and decide to follow the WikiProject's approach, we would name it after the species, Picomonas judraskeda. If the genus contains other species, we would use Picomonas as the nom suggests.

Wikipedia:Naming conventions (fauna), which has been accepted as a guideline, states: Its advice also applies to protists, when appropriate, though instructions provided by WP:Naming conventions (flora) are sometimes more applicable, especially when the article uses the scientific name. Both WP:MONOTYPICFAUNA and WP:MONOTYPICFLORA have guidelines that generally prefer using the lowest-ranked monotypic taxon name, but this is weighed against COMMONNAME and other general and topic-specific guidance.

Looking at Google Scholar hits, in order:

Picozoa – 565
Picobiliphytes – 383
Picomonas – 127
Picobiliphyta – 95
Biliphytes – 63
Picomonas -judraskeda – 47
Picomonadid – 37
Picomonadea – 25
Picomonadidae – 6

The current title, Picozoa, is the common name by a decent margin.

(NB: A recent discussion at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Tree of Life/Archive 65#Which Taxon Should Be The Article Name In Monotypy Situations for Fungi, Prokaryotes and Protista? failed to gain much traction but there certainly was no consensus to adopt a different approach for protist articles.) --MYCETEAE 🍄‍🟫—talk 16:39, 3 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]