CZ Talk:New Workgroup Requests/Sweeney

This is an interesting exercise. With regard to wheat you need to consider that it is a model system for basic research. Chris Day (talk) 10:44, 9 August 2007 (CDT)

Did you mean to have animal kingdom as a new workgroup? If you look in the forums we had discussed a tree of life subgroup of biology. The main reason is not to attempt such a huge project but to come up with naming conventions. For example, common names vs binomial names, which one is less confusing? I'll try and find the link to that discussion. Chris Day (talk) 09:49, 10 August 2007 (CDT)

Hi Chris. Thanks for the input - most welcome. Yes, I'd intended Animal Kingdom as a subgroup of Natural Science. Hadn't seen the biology forum discussion. This sandbox page is still very much a work in progress and my rambling thoughts as I look at the issue, per CZ Talk:New Workgroup Requests and before I post anything up there as a subpage. Regards, Anton Sweeney 10:11, 10 August 2007 (CDT)

A subgroup of natural science would be a workgroup, right? I would think that the following might be more logical;

• Natural science
  • Biology
    • Tree of Life
      • Animals
      • Plants
    • Botany
    • Zoology

An actually this demonstrates and nice problem with simple hierarchies right here. Animal and plant TOL pages not under botany and zoology. Antoher possible treatment would be:

• Natural science
  • Biology
    • Botany
      • Tree of Life
        • Plants
    • Zoology
      • Tree of Life
        • Animals

So already we have three different (and logical) alternatives :) Chris Day (talk) 10:35, 10 August 2007 (CDT)