This article was reviewed by member(s) of WikiProject Articles for creation. The project works to allow users to contribute quality articles and media files to the encyclopedia and track their progress as they are developed. To participate, please visit the project page for more information.Articles for creationWikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creationTemplate:WikiProject Articles for creationAfC articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Fungi, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Fungi on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.FungiWikipedia:WikiProject FungiTemplate:WikiProject FungiFungi articles
This needs some work. I updated the taxobox to a species box, adding the given taxonomy to the taxonomy template, but I don't feel confident this is correct, given the state of the Agaricales article. - UtherSRG(talk) 11:43, 31 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@UtherSRG:, as far as I'm aware there isn't a consensus on Wikipedia to follow any particular classification for fungi. If Mycobank and Index Fungorum disagree, I don't mess with the classification. Mycobank has Singerocybe in Tricholomataceae, and in Index Fungorum it is incertae sedis in Agaricales.
There's a 2020 article by Wijayawardene (and dozens of other authors) that provides a classification of organisms studied by mycologists (including slime molds). Wijayawardene didn't do any phylogenetic work for that article; it's a compilation of various other studies. And there's been a little bit of discussion at the project page about not wanting to follow some of the studies underlying Wijayawardene. Wijayawardene has Singerocybe (and Clitocybe) as incertae sedis in Agaricales. Clitocybaceae wasn't validly published until late November 2020 (there was an earlier invalid publication), so too late to be incorporated into Wijayawardene. Plantdrew (talk) 21:52, 31 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]