Talk:Phylogenetic comparative methods

This article does not appear to really be about anything, certainly not a coherent and unified group of methods that deserve their own central overview. The bulk of the article is given to lists, which are not really encyclopedic or relevant; and there is already a list of computational phylogenetics software article that the software links could link to. What little actual content is in this article is more about phylogenetics than anything else, though how a quote from Aristotle relates to 'controversy' is beyond me. If this article is to remain, it needs the lists chopped and the text dramatically expanded to reflect a consistent body of work on a coherent subject. Opabinia regalis 02:00, 2 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed - I was hoping to find an actual discussion of various phylogenetic comparative methods, but instead found something pretty vague. If nothing else, I'd suggest moving this to comparative phylogenetics, or something... — flamingspinach | (talk) 08:56, 21 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]