Talk:polyactina

RFV discussion: October 2022–February 2023
The Webster entry the definition is copied from is for, so this is most likely a typo. That said, both forms garner some hits on Google Books, although from a brief glance I can't tell whether they are referring to the same thing or not. It doesn't help that both occur as part of binomial species names, polluting the search results.

Bonus questions: Should this be capitalized? The book capitalizes all headwords so it's unclear. And is this even English or Translingual/taxonomic Latin? Many of the relevant Google Books results for Polyactinia capitalize and/or italicize it. 98.170.164.88 04:47, 14 October 2022 (UTC)


 * Compare, brought to RFV by me earlier in the year.
 * I won't speedy this but it should be an easy fail after a month. This, that and the other (talk) 12:26, 14 October 2022 (UTC)
 * Among Translingual terms:
 * There appears to be a recent (c. 1991) genus (ichnogenus) Polyactina of "[m]icrobioerosional trace fossils".
 * There are seven taxa with forms of adj. polyactinus and, perhaps, noun polyactinum, mostly polyactina, as an epithet. DCDuring (talk) 14:51, 14 October 2022 (UTC)
 * I'm not planning to add entries for either. We have entries for bioerosion, bioerosional, and microbioerosion, but not microbioerosional. DCDuring (talk) 15:14, 14 October 2022 (UTC)

RFV Failed, after somewhat more than a month. Ioaxxere (talk) 02:53, 14 February 2023 (UTC)