CZ Talk:Biology Week/PLoS: Difference between revisions
imported>Chris Day |
imported>Daniel Mietchen |
||
Line 26: | Line 26: | ||
::Thanks, i accidently wrote them there instead of here on the talk page. [[User:Chris Day|Chris Day]] 01:06, 26 June 2008 (CDT) | ::Thanks, i accidently wrote them there instead of here on the talk page. [[User:Chris Day|Chris Day]] 01:06, 26 June 2008 (CDT) | ||
wow, realy nice pictures. keep up the good work. back to studying. [[User:Tom Kelly|Tom Kelly]] 23:19, 25 June 2008 (CDT) | wow, realy nice pictures. keep up the good work. back to studying. [[User:Tom Kelly|Tom Kelly]] 23:19, 25 June 2008 (CDT) | ||
:For the moment, I just wanted to have a nice image for the PLoS article. However, this image was created with the idea in mind that it might serve other purposes, too - e.g. as the Biology Week logo and (in a version without the calendar insert) as an image in [[Biology]] (instead of the current [[:Montage2.jpg]] by which it was inspired. Clickability was foreseen for a Core Article version but don't have time for that right now. In order to make such an image useful for Core Articles, we would have to go for a more systematic representation of biological levels of organization in the image (currently, the focus is very much on the organismic level, whereas population as well as molecular levels are lacking). Input is very welcome. -- [[User:Daniel Mietchen|Daniel Mietchen]] 03:02, 26 June 2008 (CDT) |
Revision as of 03:02, 26 June 2008
Image of Life Cycle
Some biogeochemical cycle or any organism's cycle of life may give an idea of of biology spanning life and death, as also the theme of "recurrence". Example like this may be drawn by an artist. Supten Sarbadhikari 06:33, 19 June 2008 (CDT)
Expansion of the article for PLoS
Some of the points clarified by Larry at CZ:Myths_and_Facts may be used. Supten Sarbadhikari 06:41, 19 June 2008 (CDT)
Sure, if you think they'll help.
Some comments:
- Traditional models relied on a set of paid editors whose combined expertise covered all fields within the scope of the reference work and who wrote individual articles rather independently, with little involvement of others. However, this model does not scale with the expansion of scientific (and other) knowledge.
I don't think scalability is the greatest, or at least the only advantage. Collaboration can make for more exhaustive and balanced coverage of a topic. Also, while editors and authors aren't paid, the results are free--hence, the impact of the work is greater.
We do want to get other Workgroup Weeks started...I have too much to do! But until we've set the dates, we can't report on them.
As to the rest, it's looking good! --Larry Sanger 12:08, 19 June 2008 (CDT)
Article Draft
Will the draft of the article be posted here? Supten Sarbadhikari 23:50, 24 June 2008 (CDT)
- I had foreseen CZ:Biology Week/PLoS#Text for that -- just below the structure of the article. I plan to do most of the writing this Sunday (29). Will you be here then, too? -- Daniel Mietchen 03:16, 25 June 2008 (CDT)
- Usually I'm offline Saturday and Sunday. I'd be online Monday June 30, 02:30 hrs. UTC onwards. Supten Sarbadhikari 22:14, 25 June 2008 (CDT)
nice pictures!
Daniel, This is a beautiful figure. Are you planing on having the images clickable? Chris Day 23:12, 25 June 2008 (CDT)
- copied Chris's comment from the CZ page. It gave me the idea to comment as well. Tom Kelly 01:02, 26 June 2008 (CDT)
- Thanks, i accidently wrote them there instead of here on the talk page. Chris Day 01:06, 26 June 2008 (CDT)
wow, realy nice pictures. keep up the good work. back to studying. Tom Kelly 23:19, 25 June 2008 (CDT)
- For the moment, I just wanted to have a nice image for the PLoS article. However, this image was created with the idea in mind that it might serve other purposes, too - e.g. as the Biology Week logo and (in a version without the calendar insert) as an image in Biology (instead of the current Montage2.jpg by which it was inspired. Clickability was foreseen for a Core Article version but don't have time for that right now. In order to make such an image useful for Core Articles, we would have to go for a more systematic representation of biological levels of organization in the image (currently, the focus is very much on the organismic level, whereas population as well as molecular levels are lacking). Input is very welcome. -- Daniel Mietchen 03:02, 26 June 2008 (CDT)