Kin selection has been listed as one of the
Natural sciences good articles under the
good article criteria. If you can improve it further,
please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can
reassess it. Review: January 23, 2022. ( Reviewed version). |
This article is written in British English, which has its own spelling conventions (colour, travelled, centre, defence, artefact, analyse) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus. |
This article is rated GA-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
This article was reviewed by
Nature (journal) on December 14, 2005. Comments: It was found to have 3 errors. All were then fixed. For more information about external reviews of Wikipedia articles and about this review in particular, see this page. |
This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 30 March 2020 and 5 June 2020. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Decasg.
Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT ( talk) 01:47, 17 January 2022 (UTC)
darwin needs to be in the introduction...
but why not moving fisher/haldane/hamilton to a "history" section immediately following the introduction? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 194.117.2.51 ( talk) 16:43, 10 March 2013 (UTC)
This section badly needs to be rewritten as it hardly can be seen as NPOV (no matter if the factual information is right or wrong).
Curtd59 (
talk)
07:55, 18 August 2014 (UTC) In the context of intellectual history, this section reflects a postmodern cum marxist, cum cosmopolitan advocacy of pseudoscience as part of the postmodern attempt to displace the study of Darwin (See Macdonald, See Hicks). All creatures in all cases, demonstrate kin selection, meaning limits to transfers, and decreasing cooperation with genetic distance. All human societies no matter how mixed demonstrate this behavior except on the margins where mating across groups produces status benefits, or provides access to superior out-group mates (white males and asian females for example). And applies equally within group to social classes. Cross mating increases with the adoption of the nuclear family structure (fragmentation) and declines with the retention of the traditional family. Furthermore, there is no conflict between kin selection and multi-level selection, since both occur for different reasons. The fact that we must constantly defend the knowledge economy against mysticism is one thing. The fact that we must defend it against politically motivated advocacy of pseudoscience is somehow worse.
Article says "If you save a grandchild or a nephew, the advantage is only two and a half to one. If you only save a first cousin, the effect is very slight."
Yet even cats share 90% of our genes, which are rather more distant relatives than a cousin. How does the math of "shared genes" really work? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.167.63.27 ( talk) 04:09, 11 January 2017 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 4 external links on Kin selection. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 04:05, 6 May 2017 (UTC)
The first sentence states that kin selection is an evolutionary strategy. I think this is incorrect - Kin selection is a mechanism of evolution in the same way as natural selection. Kin selection operates when interacting individuals are related, and the phenotype of one individual affects the direct fitness of other individuals.
In all realistic populations interacting individuals are positively related because dispersal is limited, and individuals in the same area should have some recent common ancestor. All cooperative and competitive phenotypes will be shaped by kin selection, which makes kin selection the most general mechanism of evolution! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tomahawk Tasmania ( talk • contribs) 17:38, 7 April 2020 (UTC)
I've grouped the 'Human' materials in the article under 3 subsection headings. However, too much of it consists of uninterpreted primary research reports, i.e. A studied X, B studied Y, C studied Z: all basically close to useless and unencyclopedic. What we need is 'Hypothesis H is supported by A's study of X', etc. The article already has a substantial 'theory' section but it's only weakly connected to the many post-Hamilton studies, so the article's structure as a connected argument is, well, weak and rambling. We need the evidence to support (or refute) the theory, not go on about who worked on what. Chiswick Chap ( talk) 13:12, 28 August 2021 (UTC)
Please define all variables. What is p? What do the subscripts mean? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 180.222.11.194 ( talk) 01:53, 29 August 2021 (UTC)
GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
Reviewer: CaptainEek ( talk · contribs) 21:04, 22 January 2022 (UTC)
All in all, nicely done. I have not yet reviewed your images since I suggest you add more first. Ping me once you've got this taken care of and we'll go from there :) CaptainEek Edits Ho Cap'n! ⚓ 21:04, 22 January 2022 (UTC)
Kin selection has been listed as one of the
Natural sciences good articles under the
good article criteria. If you can improve it further,
please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can
reassess it. Review: January 23, 2022. ( Reviewed version). |
This article is written in British English, which has its own spelling conventions (colour, travelled, centre, defence, artefact, analyse) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus. |
This article is rated GA-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
This article was reviewed by
Nature (journal) on December 14, 2005. Comments: It was found to have 3 errors. All were then fixed. For more information about external reviews of Wikipedia articles and about this review in particular, see this page. |
This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 30 March 2020 and 5 June 2020. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Decasg.
Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT ( talk) 01:47, 17 January 2022 (UTC)
darwin needs to be in the introduction...
but why not moving fisher/haldane/hamilton to a "history" section immediately following the introduction? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 194.117.2.51 ( talk) 16:43, 10 March 2013 (UTC)
This section badly needs to be rewritten as it hardly can be seen as NPOV (no matter if the factual information is right or wrong).
Curtd59 (
talk)
07:55, 18 August 2014 (UTC) In the context of intellectual history, this section reflects a postmodern cum marxist, cum cosmopolitan advocacy of pseudoscience as part of the postmodern attempt to displace the study of Darwin (See Macdonald, See Hicks). All creatures in all cases, demonstrate kin selection, meaning limits to transfers, and decreasing cooperation with genetic distance. All human societies no matter how mixed demonstrate this behavior except on the margins where mating across groups produces status benefits, or provides access to superior out-group mates (white males and asian females for example). And applies equally within group to social classes. Cross mating increases with the adoption of the nuclear family structure (fragmentation) and declines with the retention of the traditional family. Furthermore, there is no conflict between kin selection and multi-level selection, since both occur for different reasons. The fact that we must constantly defend the knowledge economy against mysticism is one thing. The fact that we must defend it against politically motivated advocacy of pseudoscience is somehow worse.
Article says "If you save a grandchild or a nephew, the advantage is only two and a half to one. If you only save a first cousin, the effect is very slight."
Yet even cats share 90% of our genes, which are rather more distant relatives than a cousin. How does the math of "shared genes" really work? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.167.63.27 ( talk) 04:09, 11 January 2017 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 4 external links on Kin selection. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 04:05, 6 May 2017 (UTC)
The first sentence states that kin selection is an evolutionary strategy. I think this is incorrect - Kin selection is a mechanism of evolution in the same way as natural selection. Kin selection operates when interacting individuals are related, and the phenotype of one individual affects the direct fitness of other individuals.
In all realistic populations interacting individuals are positively related because dispersal is limited, and individuals in the same area should have some recent common ancestor. All cooperative and competitive phenotypes will be shaped by kin selection, which makes kin selection the most general mechanism of evolution! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tomahawk Tasmania ( talk • contribs) 17:38, 7 April 2020 (UTC)
I've grouped the 'Human' materials in the article under 3 subsection headings. However, too much of it consists of uninterpreted primary research reports, i.e. A studied X, B studied Y, C studied Z: all basically close to useless and unencyclopedic. What we need is 'Hypothesis H is supported by A's study of X', etc. The article already has a substantial 'theory' section but it's only weakly connected to the many post-Hamilton studies, so the article's structure as a connected argument is, well, weak and rambling. We need the evidence to support (or refute) the theory, not go on about who worked on what. Chiswick Chap ( talk) 13:12, 28 August 2021 (UTC)
Please define all variables. What is p? What do the subscripts mean? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 180.222.11.194 ( talk) 01:53, 29 August 2021 (UTC)
GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
Reviewer: CaptainEek ( talk · contribs) 21:04, 22 January 2022 (UTC)
All in all, nicely done. I have not yet reviewed your images since I suggest you add more first. Ping me once you've got this taken care of and we'll go from there :) CaptainEek Edits Ho Cap'n! ⚓ 21:04, 22 January 2022 (UTC)