# Talk:Holozoa

Since the taxonomy template of all other clades is writing the taxa as "clade" instead of the unappealing "(unranked)", why should it be different for Template:Taxonomy/Holozoa and Template:Taxonomy/Opisthokonta? ☽ Snoteleks ☾ 19:43, 7 June 2023 (UTC)

The Holozoa spans at least 6 major groups, of which 1 is Animalia/Metazoa. So why have 6 out of 12 images of Animals? This is basically just human-centred-ism as the group we are in gets shamelessly 6 times over-represented. If your dice give you 6 sixes out of 12 throws, they're loaded. I suggest we have a single image of a single-celled Holozoan, or perhaps 2 such organisms; neither of them should be an Animal. It's really time we stopped that sort of thing on Wikipedia. All the best, Chiswick Chap (talk) 09:31, 17 November 2024 (UTC)

@Chiswick Chap I agree, but I have always seen Wikipedia cater to the human-centric average reader experience, with the ever-present reference point of animals (and other organisms like plants) that we are most familiar with. Also, animals are vastly more diverse than their holozoan relatives, which led me to believe that it would be just as accurate. Since I have your support, I will change the image to make it more phylogenetically accurate. — Snoteleks (talk) 13:25, 17 November 2024 (UTC)
Many thanks. Chiswick Chap (talk) 13:31, 17 November 2024 (UTC)