well yes and no the munida page on worms shows two identical taxa listed under munida but doesn't explicitly say that they're the same as the ones listed as genera in munididae indeed if that connection had been made they probably wouldn't be listed additionally as genera i realise that's a pretty fine distinction but it is important we all think they're erroneous but we don't have a source to cite for that i doubt that komai states that the two things listed on worms are erroneous entries yet you claim komai as a reference for that we're in danger of slipping back into original research here i'd like to see komai's paper before i commit myself but i think the current wording will have to be changed i might add that the personal attack you made is plainly unhelpful note also that the version you fixed is very different from the one at the centre of the dispute so boasting about how easy it was may not be warranted