Talk:Taxonomy of Archaea domain: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
imported>Chris Day |
imported>Dalton Holland Baptista |
||
| Line 8: | Line 8: | ||
:In short now that we actually have several writers interested in taxonomy we could probably work out our own system. So feel free to experiment with different ideas and see what works best. This project is young enough that we are not yet fixed into a particular format or style. To coin a phrase, "the world is your oyster". [[User:Chris Day|Chris Day]] 03:26, 3 March 2009 (UTC) | :In short now that we actually have several writers interested in taxonomy we could probably work out our own system. So feel free to experiment with different ideas and see what works best. This project is young enough that we are not yet fixed into a particular format or style. To coin a phrase, "the world is your oyster". [[User:Chris Day|Chris Day]] 03:26, 3 March 2009 (UTC) | ||
::Well Chris, this will be good to see because I am not sure as yet about the best place to host the orchids taxonomy page. As I see it, it is not really an article, however, it migh be good to have it easy to anyone checking the article. I guess I should explain there all decisions and references (to be) used to this subject and might also work as a discussion about it case more people starts writing about this subject. For instance, there are some genera where there is no consensus at all about how to call them, although some decision will have to be made because probably we will have only one article to each species and it is not good to have two taxonomic choices mixed. (a side note: is the English language correction army ready? No, [[Orchid]] is not finished as yet) [[User:Dalton Holland Baptista|Dalton Holland Baptista]] 03:52, 3 March 2009 (UTC) | |||
Revision as of 21:52, 2 March 2009
Opinion needed
Just wandering if this article should be a subpage of Archaea or it is better to stand by itself. Dalton Holland Baptista 03:23, 3 March 2009 (UTC)
- I was wondering the same thing. I have no easy answer and i could see this article being quite interesting. Although the list itself should probably be a catalog or maintained as masterlists, similar to Leptotes/Related Articles/Masterlist.
- In short now that we actually have several writers interested in taxonomy we could probably work out our own system. So feel free to experiment with different ideas and see what works best. This project is young enough that we are not yet fixed into a particular format or style. To coin a phrase, "the world is your oyster". Chris Day 03:26, 3 March 2009 (UTC)
- Well Chris, this will be good to see because I am not sure as yet about the best place to host the orchids taxonomy page. As I see it, it is not really an article, however, it migh be good to have it easy to anyone checking the article. I guess I should explain there all decisions and references (to be) used to this subject and might also work as a discussion about it case more people starts writing about this subject. For instance, there are some genera where there is no consensus at all about how to call them, although some decision will have to be made because probably we will have only one article to each species and it is not good to have two taxonomic choices mixed. (a side note: is the English language correction army ready? No, Orchid is not finished as yet) Dalton Holland Baptista 03:52, 3 March 2009 (UTC)