Talk:Australian lungfish

message: I have replaced this article in the :Category:Living fossils.  The article was removed with the edit comment "see pertinent discussion", but there is no discussion at all about this on either this talk page or the category talk page, nor any hint of where such a "pertinent" discussion may have been held.
If a species that is one of the oldest, if not the oldest, extant vertebrate species - being identical to fossils over 100 million years old - does not qualify as a living fossil, then I don't know what does qualify. Nick Thorne talk 13:38, 29 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Living fossils 

message: It says that the fish are 250mm upon hatching, but that they obtain a length of 25cm (aka 250mm) by the end of six months.  I am in no way an expert on this animal, but I'd imagine it does grow.
::Fixed - Nick Thorne talk 23:58, 19 August 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Growth and Development 

message: In the chapter breathing: 
A distinctive characteristic of the Queensland lungfish is the presence of a lung-like swim bladder. Modified into a vascularized air-breathing organ (...) 
is WRONG. I learned (during editing of the German wiki) that the lung was the original organ! From this ancient lung, the Tetrapods further developped this organ for breathing, whereas later the Actinopterygii further developped this organ into a swimm bladder. --> The swim bladder developped from the lung, not vice versa! I have the literature G. Allen, Field Guide to the Freshwater Fishes of Australia as well, but it is wrong at this point. -- Der Regenbogenfisch (talk) 07:43, 28 July 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: It does not really matter what the German Wiki says, what matters is what the sources say.  If you have an authoritative source that contradicts Allen, then show us what it is and we can have a discussion about it, but Allen is rather authorative on Australian fish, and the book was published by the CSIRO and Western Australian Museum. - Nick Thorne talk 14:40, 28 July 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Excuse me for misunderstanding, I wanted to say that in the German Wiki are the respective sources in the article and in the discussion. Additionally you may look into the English wiki Swim bladder, chapter "Evolution" with its source no.5. (I know that Allen is an expert on Australian fish, but is he an expert in Evolutionary biology of fish? - (By the way, I am not, too)) -- Der Regenbogenfisch (talk) 18:06, 13 August 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Development of the lung 

message: Is it edible? I think a subsection about its culinary use would be a great improvement to this page.Zigzig20s (talk) 08:55, 13 February 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: I have only just seen this. Queensland lungfish are a totally protected species. discussion about its culinary use is inappropriate.  - Nick Thorne talk 23:56, 5 June 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Culinary use? 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to  on Queensland lungfish. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add  after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add  to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20070316002511/http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au:80/story/0,20867,19859367-30417,00.html to http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,20867,19859367-30417,00.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 09:08, 7 January 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified  on Queensland lungfish. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20050623075622/http://www.nativefish.asn.au:80/lungfish.html to http://www.nativefish.asn.au/lungfish.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 22:31, 20 July 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Ceratodontiformes is an order with many other members than this species (such as the namesake Ceratodus), and should therefore be a separate article. FunkMonk (talk) 22:49, 28 August 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: This! The Australian Lungfish might be the only extant member in the order but it's not evem the sole taxon in its genus, much less so in its family and entire order. --Draco ignoramus sophomoricus (talk) 11:38, 19 September 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Ceratodontiformes should not redirect here 

message: Both fishbase and the Australian museum use Australian lungfish.  That should be good enough fo wikipedia. - Nick Thorne talk 02:16, 30 October 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Common name 

message: The species box shows this species as endangered, but the text says that, while there is cause for concern, studies have not shown that it qualifies as endangered.  Who is right? J S Ayer (talk) 03:27, 1 February 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species currently lists the Queensland Lungfish as endangered CryolophosaurusEllioti (talk) 03:33, 2 July 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Conservation Status