Talk:Biology

Latest comment: 17 days ago by Kodning in topic Cat sort order
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

Article review

edit

@Boneless Pizza!: With this edit you indicated that this article might need to go to WP:GAR. Is this still the case? If so, do you want to post it there? Z1720 (talk) 16:19, 3 April 2026 (UTC)Reply

Yes since it has a lot of unsource statements but I wont nominate it to GAR since I have no IQ about this topic at all. 🍕BP!🍕 (🔔) 18:38, 3 April 2026 (UTC)Reply
  • @Boneless Pizza!: I am not sure what is meant by "no IQ about this topic at all." An editor does not need to be a subject matter expert to bring an article to GAR, and doesn't need an extensive background in the topic to see when statements are uncited. I totally understand if you don't want to bring this to GAR, but I encourage you to do so as you can explain your concerns more effectively than me. Z1720 (talk) 02:19, 7 April 2026 (UTC)Reply
    The problem with the current text is not that it is missing a few citations. Back in 2010 the 3300-word article correctly listed biology disciplines (now all gone), and devoted much of its space to 'Research', i.e. what the disciplines do, as you'd expect for a science. That's all gone as well. Instead, most of the article isn't about the science at all, but is about Life, which is the object of study. It's as if Botany was a CFORK of Plant, or Medicine was a CFORK of Disease: obvious nonsense, and no use whatsoever. We could begin again from the 2010 text (omitting its 'Foundations of biology' chapter which was about Life): this would be a major reversion and rewrite. I may do it as it's a total embarrassment at the moment; even a short correct summary would be an improvement on a confused rabbit-hole diversion. Chiswick Chap (talk) 09:24, 12 April 2026 (UTC)Reply
    Right, I've removed all the off-topic (object-of-study) material and added text and sources on some of the constituent sciences so we have a plain but focused article. We should not now need a GAR. Chiswick Chap (talk) 12:52, 12 April 2026 (UTC)Reply
    Sad to see the article went to be like that but thank you for your hardwork at this article. 🍕BP!🍕 (🔔) 20:59, 12 April 2026 (UTC)Reply
    Many thanks. Chiswick Chap (talk) 07:39, 13 April 2026 (UTC)Reply

Cat sort order

edit

Needs a space as a cat sort order. ~2026-28417-94 (talk) 09:35, 24 May 2026 (UTC)Reply

Please clarify what change you are requesting. Day Creature (talk) 16:19, 24 May 2026 (UTC)Reply
It seems that someone has just sorted the category out. Chiswick Chap (talk) 19:47, 24 May 2026 (UTC)Reply
not they haven't. u have been around long enuff to sort it out. ~2026-28417-94 (talk) 07:51, 27 May 2026 (UTC)Reply
Have a look at the category and have a think. ~2026-28417-94 (talk) 07:50, 27 May 2026 (UTC)Reply
What? That's not how requested edits work. Read the instructions in the yellow box above and follow them exactly. Chiswick Chap (talk) 07:58, 27 May 2026 (UTC)Reply
 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want made. Please detail the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. Kodning 🌸 (talk) 08:52, 27 May 2026 (UTC)Reply

PUT A VERT BAR AND SPACE IN [[Category:Biology]] LIKE THIS [[Category:Biology| ]]. GO AND LEARN ABOUT EDITING FFS ! ~2026-28417-94 (talk) 08:58, 2 June 2026 (UTC)Reply

 Done Please be civil. Kodning 🌸 (talk) 09:15, 2 June 2026 (UTC)Reply