Jump to content

Talk:Biology

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Good articleBiology has been listed as one of the Natural sciences good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
January 19, 2004Refreshing brilliant proseNot kept
August 11, 2006Good article nomineeListed
September 2, 2006Good article reassessmentDelisted
January 10, 2010Good article nomineeListed
Current status: Good article


Semi-protected edit request on 26 October 2023

[edit]

In the 'Evolution' -> 'History of Life' section, the link to 'Microbial mats' is misspelled. Change 'Microbal mats' to 'Microbial mats'. Zhedeye (talk) 11:42, 26 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

 Done WanderingMorpheme 13:37, 26 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 31 March 2024 . Defining the Life.

[edit]
Muhammad Akram of Kohat (talk) 10:15, 31 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Life; life is a set of characteristics: 1-Growth 2-Reproduction 3-Respiration 4-Movement or Locomotion

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. Isla🏳️‍⚧ 10:33, 31 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]


Semi-protected edit request on 3 May 2024. Organization of Atoms to Ecosystem.

[edit]

Organization of Atoms to Ecosystem--MoniqueChacon1 (talk) 20:00, 3 May 2024 (UTC) Atom---Lithium Molecule-- Water Macromolecule--DNA Cell---Euglena Tissue--cubodial epithelium Organ-- Brain Organ System--Respiratory system Organism-- Cat Population-- Lions Community--- Lions and Zebras Ecosystem-- lions, zebras, trees, grass, soil Biosphere-- life on earth[reply]


Four common components cells share: 1. A Plasma membrane 2. Cytoplasm 3. DNA 4. Ribosomes

Resources:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iRXmJhAp7Z4

Article references: https://bio.libretexts.org/Bookshelves/Introductory_and_General_Biology/Book%3A_General_Biology_(Boundless)/01%3A_The_Study_of_Life/1.08%3A__Themes_and_Concepts_of_Biology_-_Levels_of_Organization_of_Living_Things

https://sciencenotes.org/levels-of-organization-in-biology/

CITEVAR

[edit]

@So9q, please don't change established citation styles per WP:CITEVAR. Remsense ‥ 论 07:02, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@User:Remsense:Could you elaborate?
What is the established style of this page? Is it possible to achieve that using citeq? (citeq currently supports cs1+2 and I'm willing to improve it in case you have a problem with how it displays the citation)
Additionally according to citevar this is considered best practice:

making citations added by other editors match the existing style (if any). Do not revert someone else's contribution merely because the citation style doesn't match. If you know how to fix it, then fix it.

So an additional question I have is: did you try to fix it and gave up?
These edits seems helpful to me as they help the users find the resource in question more easily and provide more information that bare text references.--So9q (talk) 08:44, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Cite style refers to both what appears for readers and what underlying method is used in wikitext for editors: all you did was change the established cite style, so there was nothing to do but revert. It's not 100% consistent across the article, but it's pretty clear that standard WP:CS1 is much more established than {{Cite Q}}, which is a neat idea but unfortunately has comparatively little utility onwiki at present—it's simply not fair to expect other editors of established articles to learn how to use it, frankly. Remsense ‥ 论 08:58, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@User:Remsense Thanks for the fast response.
I read more on the documentation template and there seem to be something called CiteVar wars ongoing in the articles, which seems very unfortunate. The citeq template defaults to cs2 but it has a mode=cs1 parameter.
I tried adapting citeq to mimick the current citation as close as possible:
Current citation:
Mosconi, Francesco; Julou, Thomas; Desprat, Nicolas; Sinha, Deepak Kumar; Allemand, Jean-François; Vincent Croquette; Bensimon, David (2008). "Some nonlinear challenges in biology". Nonlinearity. 21 (8): T131. Bibcode:2008Nonli..21..131M. doi:10.1088/0951-7715/21/8/T03. S2CID 119808230.
Would become
Mosconi, Francesco; Julou, Thomas; Desprat, Nicolas; Sinha, Deepak Kumar; Allemand, Jean-François; Vincent Croquette; Bensimon, David (10 July 2008). "Some nonlinear challenges in biology". Nonlinearity. 21 (8): T131. Bibcode:2008Nonli..21..131M. doi:10.1088/0951-7715/21/8/T03. ISSN 0951-7715. S2CID 119808230. Zbl 1144.37469. Wikidata Q110468092.
The only thing differing then is:
  • the date from Wikidata is more precise
  • ISSN is added
  • Zbl is added
  • Wikidata id is added which has the following advantages:
    • makes it way easier for all sister projects that want to translate this article because they don't have to mess with local enwiki citation templates at all if they have citeq.
    • makes it possible to easily judge where a given source is used across all articles of all language versions of Wikipedia
    • makes it possible to count the most used citations and find full text sources for them using AI agents as part of the WikiCite project.
    • etc.
This seems like improvements to me. WDYT? So9q (talk) 09:26, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Please feel free to add those identifiers to the existing citations, but I'll reiterate that {{Cite Q}} isn't used on this article, and you shouldn't unilaterally introduce it for the reasons I've just said. Remsense ‥ 论 09:33, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Okay, I hear that before the first switch to citeq in any article you would like me to discuss in the talk page first, is that correct? So9q (talk) 16:27, 20 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
That's true for switching CITEVAR in general; generally, there has to be some reason that convinces other editors to consent to major changes. Unfortunately, Cite Q is essentially an open-beta idea that never really became familiar or caught on for most. If I can be frank, in all likelihood the prospect of a switch would be a non-starter. Repeating what I said above, in my view it would be unfair to expect editors to start having to use it for such an important, well-established article. When all we get are a few tertiary identifiers for our trouble that can easily be added to the existing templates in any case, I'm going to say it's not going to be possible, sorry. Remsense ‥ 论 16:46, 20 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I understand. I'm going to suggest a hidden |qid= parameter be added to all citation templates instead, which will not require anyone to learn anything new nor conflict with CITEVAR. So9q (talk) 16:55, 20 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I think that would be a neat idea in some form, but bear in mind WP:CS1 is the most intricate piece of user-facing tech on the site just about, and changes are especially nontrivial. Remsense ‥ 论 17:00, 20 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Biology&oldid=1248857798"