Talk:Caniformia

Untitled

Is the statement "All members of this group (with the exception of Canidae) have non-retractile claws" true? Which of the canidae have retractable claws? Nitpyck (talk) 23:53, 19 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Great layout

I really like the list of families on this page, and the way each is illustrated with a photo. That section is very well put together. -68.191.214.241 (talk) 06:58, 25 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Picture of dog confusing

The picture labeled "Dog (Canis lupus familiaris)", imho, is a really bad choice. The English wikipedia, due to English being a common second language, is widely accessed by the international community for its unsurpassed number and quality of articles. While one with a good command of English will certainly see said photo for what it is, a picture of a very strange- and unusual-looking breed of dog, it's a typical example of something that will only serve to confuse others. Someone do the world a favour and upload an Alsacian or husky or even a poodle, anything that can be immediately recognized as a dog... Aadieu (talk) 18:13, 23 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It looks like a pretty common dog to me, but there were far too many images on this article, so I removed it along with some others. Ucucha 18:20, 23 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Number of Families

Article says only 3 extinct caniforme families; is this still considered correct? According to Wiki article on Enaliarctos, there was a fifth pinnepid family, Desmatophocidae. One article must be wrong. Then again, the Wiki article on Hemicyonidae says that some authors consider the half-dogs to be a subfamily of Ursidae, perhaps this should also be mentioned on this page?Glevum (talk) 13:12, 19 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Pinnipedia

According to Pinniped#Evolutionary history, it is debated whether pinnipeds are more closely related to bears or mustelids. The text and tree should reflect this state of research. It's probably best to show Pinnipedia, Ursidae and Musteloidae as three parallel clades under Arctoidea for the sake of NPOV. Arctoidea and Carnivora too should have noncommittal trees if the matter is not clear. --Florian Blaschke (talk) 23:46, 4 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned references in Caniformia

I check pages listed in Category:Pages with incorrect ref formatting to try to fix reference errors. One of the things I do is look for content for orphaned references in wikilinked articles. I have found content for some of Caniformia's orphans, the problem is that I found more than one version. I can't determine which (if any) is correct for this article, so I am asking for a sentient editor to look it over and copy the correct ref content into this article.

Reference named "Arnason2006":

From Eared seal: Arnason, U.; et al. (2006). "Pinniped phylogeny and a new hypothesis for their origin and dispersal". Molecular Phylogenetics and Evolution. 41 (2): 345–354. doi:10.1016/j.ympev.2006.05.022. PMID 16815048. {{cite journal}}: Explicit use of et al. in: |author= (help)
From Pinniped: Arnason, U.; Gullberg, A.; Janke, A.; Kullberg, M.; Lehman, N.; Petrov, E. A.; Väinölä, R. (2006). "Pinniped phylogeny and a new hypothesis for their origin and dispersal". Molecular Phylogenetics and Evolution. 41 (2): 345–54. doi:10.1016/j.ympev.2006.05.022. PMID 16815048.{{cite journal}}: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link)

I apologize if any of the above are effectively identical; I am just a simple computer program, so I can't determine whether minor differences are significant or not. AnomieBOT ⚡ 20:57, 31 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion:

Hemicyon white background.jpg

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 16:27, 8 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Phylogeny

The cladogram in this article is based on Flynn (2005) and differs quite a bit from the cladogram presented in Musteloidea, which is based on Flynn (2005) with "the musteloids updated following the multigene analysis of Law et al. (2018)." Shouldn't the cladogram in this article also be so updated? --User:Khajidha (talk) (contributions) 12:48, 28 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]