Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Biology

(Redirected from Wikipedia talk:BIOL)
Latest comment: 5 days ago by 80.0.166.171 in topic Request to merge Frisson into Goose bumps

Potential significant change to species notability

edit

Over on Wikipedia talk:Notability‎, several editors are working on a draft proposal to replace our current notability guidelines for species (all species are notable) with something much more restrictive (only species that go beyond certain limited pieces of information would be allowed their own articles). If you have opinions on this issue, now would be a good time to weigh in there. —David Eppstein (talk) 00:20, 3 June 2024 (UTC)Reply

Also now at Village Pump (Policy): Wikipedia:Village_pump_(policy)#Species_notability Crossroads -talk- 01:40, 26 June 2024 (UTC)Reply

Narwhal#Evolution

edit

Hi guys, can you help me combine the two phylogenetic trees? Thanks, Wolverine XI (talk to me) 08:17, 11 June 2024 (UTC)Reply

Good article reassessment for Nature

edit

Nature has been nominated for a good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. Z1720 (talk) 20:10, 26 June 2024 (UTC)Reply

RetractionBot

edit

I posted this story from the Signpost last month. Things have evolved a bit and now Retraction bot handles {{Erratum}}, {{Expression of concern}}, and {{Retracted}}. These populate the following categories:

  1. Arsenic biochemistry
  2. Bioeconomy
  3. Biotechnology
  4. Hypoxia-inducible factor
  5. Stephen Jackson (biologist)
  6. Liposome extruder
  1. Fish intelligence
  2. Human genetic enhancement
  1. Alexander Silberman Institute of Life Sciences
  2. Biomarkers of aging
  3. Epiphenotyping
  4. Rubicon (protein)


If the citation is no longer reliable, then the article needs to be updated, which could be as minor as the removal/replacement of the citation with a reliable one, to rewriting an entire section that was based on flawed premises. If the citation to a retracted paper was intentional, like in the context of a controversy noting that a paper was later retracted, you can replace {{retraction|...}} with {{retraction|...|intentional=yes}}/{{expression of concern|...}} with {{expression of concern|...|intentional=yes}}/{{Erratum|...}} with {{Erratum|...|checked=yes}}.

I put the list of articles within the scope of WP:BIOL in sub-bullets. Any help you can give with those are greatly appreciated. Feel free to remove/strike through those you've dealt with. Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 02:57, 21 July 2024 (UTC)Reply

RfC: On discovery of the 23 nonmetals

edit

Should this content on the discovery of the 23 nonmetals be removed from the nonmetal article?

RfC is here. --- Sandbh (talk) 00:03, 26 July 2024 (UTC)Reply

Request to merge Frisson into Goose bumps

edit

I have noticed that these two articles talk about the same thing. I have created a proposal on Goose bumps's talk page to discuss a merger. 80.0.166.171 (talk) 01:05, 2 August 2024 (UTC)Reply