Untitled edit

There are two separate points here. First, Chuine et al. did demonstrate a good correlation between harvest dates and instrumental temperatures. That is clear, and I believe it is reasonable for the article to tell about that.

Second, Chuine et al. argued that 2003 was unprecedentedly warm. Keenan refuted that argument. It is incorrect to try to find some middle ground, such as “Keenan challenged that argument”. If I say that 2+2=4 and someone else says that 2+2=22, are we supposed to compromise and say 2+2=13? There is no compromise. Keenan refuted the argument. But Keenan did nothing to refute the general correlation (see especially his last sentence).

I do not, though, see why the argument and refutation about 2003 is important for an article on phenology. So I suggest dropping the point.
TheSeven 17:07, 1 July 2007 (UTC)Reply

With respect the point is not compromise but balance and objectivity. To represent Keenan's point is not about compromise but about avoiding taking sides. Plantsurfer 10:00, 3 July 2007 (UTC)Reply


arthur Silva 21:23, 22 May 2010 (UTC)

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment edit

  This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 6 January 2020 and 22 April 2020. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Manjunaf.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 06:31, 17 January 2022 (UTC)Reply

Copyright problem removed edit

Prior content in this article duplicated one or more previously published sources. The material was copied from: http://books.google.ca/books?id=2qR8Jdrd4EQC. Copied or closely paraphrased material has been rewritten or removed and must not be restored, unless it is duly released under a compatible license. (For more information, please see "using copyrighted works from others" if you are not the copyright holder of this material, or "donating copyrighted materials" if you are.) For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or published material; such additions will be deleted. Contributors may use copyrighted publications as a source of information, and according to fair use may copy sentences and phrases, provided they are included in quotation marks and referenced properly. The material may also be rewritten, but only if it does not infringe on the copyright of the original or plagiarize from that source. Therefore such paraphrased portions must provide their source. Please see our guideline on non-free text for how to properly implement limited quotations of copyrighted text. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously, and persistent violators will be blocked from editing. While we appreciate contributions, we must require all contributors to understand and comply with these policies. Thank you. Sminthopsis84 (talk) 19:53, 30 October 2014 (UTC)Reply

External links modified edit

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Phenology. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 03:25, 19 March 2016 (UTC)Reply

External links modified (January 2018) edit

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 6 external links on Phenology. 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:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 17:50, 22 January 2018 (UTC)Reply