Category talk:Lichida fossils
As all Lichida are extinct, there should be no difference in content between this cat. and Category:Lichida, so I propose to merge its content into the latter category. --Dwergenpaartje (talk) 16:38, 19 November 2013 (UTC)
Keep As has been noted before the distinction is between life restorations and fossils, with actual actual fossils/casts of fossils getting categorized into this category while and illustrations/drawings/c.g. animations of "living" specimens being placed into Category:Lichida. See the Category structuring in vertebrate fossil areas to see a more dramatic example of the separation.--Kevmin § 18:59, 19 November 2013 (UTC)
Comment Theoretically this is a nice argument. However, the use of categories in this way is counterintuitive. Practice shows it is not how the categories are being used. Images become dispersed over the one, the other and both categories. If people think it is necessary to categorise photo's of fossils from drawings and animations, my suggestion would be to create subcategories for those, and not subcategories for the real thing. Besides, categories like Tilobite linedrawing, Trilobite whole external body views with legends, Trilobite anatomy and Trilobite cladogram are already in existence. -Dwergenpaartje (talk) 21:53, 19 November 2013 (UTC)
@Dwergenpaartje and Kevmin: Stale discussion, no consensus to delete, seems some cleanup was done since this discussion anyway. If needed, can be re-opened in the future referring the current names and structure. Josh (talk) 17:35, 29 January 2019 (UTC)