Talk:Frederick Twort/Draft: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
imported>Russell Potter (rm "To approve" tag no longer needed) |
imported>Chris Day |
||
| (6 intermediate revisions by 2 users not shown) | |||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
{{subpages}} | |||
== | ==APPROVED Version 1.0== | ||
[[User: | Congratulations on another Biology approval! [[User:D. Matt Innis|Matt Innis]] [[User talk:D. Matt Innis|(Talk)]] 20:46, 25 June 2007 (CDT) | ||
<div class="usermessage plainlinks">Discussion for [http://en.citizendium.org/wiki?title=Frederick_Twort&direction=oldid=100124395 Version 1.0] stopped here. Please continue further discussion under this break. </div> | |||
==Alphabetical order puzzler== | |||
For some reason, this entry comes up under "F" instead of "T" on our list of approved entries -- all the index piping seems to be there, and the checklist is right -- what's amiss? [[User:Russell Potter|Russell Potter]] 15:45, 2 July 2007 (CDT) | |||
== The first sentence == | |||
There is discussion that the first sentence of this article: | |||
*'''Frederick William Twort''' (1877-1950) was an English [[bacteriologist]] who discovered in [[bacteriophages]], the [[viruses]] that attack and destroy [[bacteria]]. | |||
Should be replaced with: | |||
*'''Frederick William Twort''' (1877-1950) was an English [[bacteriologist]] who discovered that [[bacteriophages]] are [[viruses]] that attack and destroy [[bacteria]]. | |||
The first sentence appears to be incorrect. The second sentence appears to be factual, but is unclear whether a biologist would consider that Twort actually considered the virus a bacteriophage at the time or f this came later. Either way, this changes the meaning of the sentence considerably, which would make it a content edit. The question is whether an editor would be willing to re-approve this article with a more accurately structured sentence. [[User:D. Matt Innis|D. Matt Innis]] 03:58, 9 February 2010 (UTC) | |||
:I like the second sentence although I see what the first sentence is trying to do. I don't think that the second sentence could be considered as Twort coining the term. Possibly it could be reworded to be more explicit. I'll think about it. Is one editor enough to change it? [[User:Chris Day|Chris Day]] 05:53, 9 February 2010 (UTC) | |||
Latest revision as of 23:53, 8 February 2010
APPROVED Version 1.0
Congratulations on another Biology approval! Matt Innis (Talk) 20:46, 25 June 2007 (CDT)
Alphabetical order puzzler
For some reason, this entry comes up under "F" instead of "T" on our list of approved entries -- all the index piping seems to be there, and the checklist is right -- what's amiss? Russell Potter 15:45, 2 July 2007 (CDT)
The first sentence
There is discussion that the first sentence of this article:
- Frederick William Twort (1877-1950) was an English bacteriologist who discovered in bacteriophages, the viruses that attack and destroy bacteria.
Should be replaced with:
- Frederick William Twort (1877-1950) was an English bacteriologist who discovered that bacteriophages are viruses that attack and destroy bacteria.
The first sentence appears to be incorrect. The second sentence appears to be factual, but is unclear whether a biologist would consider that Twort actually considered the virus a bacteriophage at the time or f this came later. Either way, this changes the meaning of the sentence considerably, which would make it a content edit. The question is whether an editor would be willing to re-approve this article with a more accurately structured sentence. D. Matt Innis 03:58, 9 February 2010 (UTC)
- I like the second sentence although I see what the first sentence is trying to do. I don't think that the second sentence could be considered as Twort coining the term. Possibly it could be reworded to be more explicit. I'll think about it. Is one editor enough to change it? Chris Day 05:53, 9 February 2010 (UTC)