Talk:Species (biology): Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
imported>Jasper Wubs No edit summary |
imported>Chris Day m (Talk:Species moved to Talk:Species (biology)) |
||
(5 intermediate revisions by 4 users not shown) | |||
Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
{{ | {{subpages}} | ||
| | |||
| | Just spotted the (nice!) graphic to the right. Shouldn't it be "the hierarchy of ''taxonomic'' classification" rather than ''scientific''? --[[User:Nereo Preto|Nereo Preto]] 15:24, 4 September 2007 (CDT) | ||
*Perhaps, taxonomy, however, is a well founded science within biology, so I would feel that scientific is as correct as taxonomic. Its just a word that is a bit less specific, but I think that I do see your point (while writing this just now...) that the figure doesn't really display the entire collection of scientific classification systems that we know today, so I'll change it. Thanks! [[User:Jasper Wubs|Jasper Wubs]] 03:16, 5 September 2007 (CDT) | |||
==Definition== | |||
Just a note that there's a definition at [[Species (biology)/Definition]]. [[User:John Stephenson|John Stephenson]] 17:29, 5 September 2008 (CDT) | |||
Latest revision as of 08:51, 23 September 2008
Just spotted the (nice!) graphic to the right. Shouldn't it be "the hierarchy of taxonomic classification" rather than scientific? --Nereo Preto 15:24, 4 September 2007 (CDT)
- Perhaps, taxonomy, however, is a well founded science within biology, so I would feel that scientific is as correct as taxonomic. Its just a word that is a bit less specific, but I think that I do see your point (while writing this just now...) that the figure doesn't really display the entire collection of scientific classification systems that we know today, so I'll change it. Thanks! Jasper Wubs 03:16, 5 September 2007 (CDT)
Definition
Just a note that there's a definition at Species (biology)/Definition. John Stephenson 17:29, 5 September 2008 (CDT)