This
level-5 vital article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||
|
The German article on this topic is so much more complete - to the point it was a past featured article. I would love to see some nice bilingual person translate some of the information on the German page into English. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Psu256 ( talk • contribs) 18:38, 7 October 2005 (UTC)
The article really could do with some definition of how the kingdoms are seperated. This is what I was looking for. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 172.216.7.211 ( talk) 15:47, 23 January 2006 (UTC)
I can't help but notice how similar the word "Taxon" is to " Taxxon". (A Taxxon is a fictional alien species in the Animorphs books.) An accidental typo of one letter could send someone elsewhere! dogman15 01:15, 15 September 2007 (UTC)
At this point, the article states here that the term was introduced for animal groups in 1926 by Adolf Bernhard Meyer. It is of course possible that it took his heirs 15 years before they had this part of his work published posthumously, but as I cannot find any other reference so far as to where the term was published, by whom, and when, my first guess is that someone did not do his homework when he made a statement to this effect in the article. A reliable source is needed here, perhaps accompanied by a link to the first place of publication. Wiki klaas 16:12, 2 February 2015 (UTC)
Although preceded by Linnaeus's system in Systema Naturae (10th edition, 1758) and unpublished work by Bernard and Antoine Laurent de Jussieu, the notion of a unit-based "natural system" of biological classification was first made widely available in 1805 through the publication, as the introduction to the third edition of Jean-Baptiste Lamarck's Flore françoise, of Augustin Pyramus de Candolle's Principes élémentaires de botanique, an exposition of a system for the "natural classification" of plants.
This is an ideal scholarly sentence in many respects, and almost a work of art in compact register.
It just isn't right for Wikipedia, and the attention span of the average reader.
Sure, this is an eighth-grade reading level: but only in Starfleet Academy. — MaxEnt 21:04, 18 February 2019 (UTC)
Agree! Shorter sentences, straightforward words/and or include definitions or link. Peacedance ( talk) 23:25, 10 March 2019 (UTC)
Request for clarification on unit, but really the entire first paragraph and perhaps lead needs a rewrite.
– A unit of *what*?
– What are these units based on? (earlier physical attributes, later evolution/genomics?)
– "Population" sounds geographical. Sometimes this is the case, but not always – is another more generic word better?
– There is no hint here that a taxon can be of different levels.
How about a little context, very briefly for the lead, how did they get started, why are they continued?
There are no examples to even give the reader a *hint*.
I am a sociologist and would like to better understand the basics of taxonomy, cladistics, etc., but I really can't with the way that the articles are at this point. The introductions, at least, need to be written while imagining that the audience is a **general reader knows nothing about the topic**. That doesn't mean it can't be stuffed with fascinating information, but it does mean that terms should be defined, context and brief examples provided so the reader knows what the heck you are talking about. That also doesn't mean that the article can't get into more sophisticated detail later in the article.
I know more about this than I am implying, and could try to rewrite it myself, but I don't know enough to ensure that I am not making subtle mistakes that are misleading.
But help out the rest of us in the lead! Please! Peacedance ( talk) 23:25, 10 March 2019 (UTC)
The animal classification image shows nine things, while the description says 'eight'. Fix the spelling error to make sure that it matches. 111.88.15.221 ( talk) 17:00, 27 October 2019 (UTC)
Le plus important serait le taxon lazare un sous claque comme la Queen . Et mickeal jackson je nais pas vue et le super classe . Order classe . Reptilien mais seulement des lignéa sang pure . Mon ami est sous classe mais lazare revenue 2005 . . Il est différent. Que vous être. Oui je suis content . . 70.55.128.180 ( talk) 21:04, 19 December 2021 (UTC)
This
level-5 vital article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||
|
The German article on this topic is so much more complete - to the point it was a past featured article. I would love to see some nice bilingual person translate some of the information on the German page into English. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Psu256 ( talk • contribs) 18:38, 7 October 2005 (UTC)
The article really could do with some definition of how the kingdoms are seperated. This is what I was looking for. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 172.216.7.211 ( talk) 15:47, 23 January 2006 (UTC)
I can't help but notice how similar the word "Taxon" is to " Taxxon". (A Taxxon is a fictional alien species in the Animorphs books.) An accidental typo of one letter could send someone elsewhere! dogman15 01:15, 15 September 2007 (UTC)
At this point, the article states here that the term was introduced for animal groups in 1926 by Adolf Bernhard Meyer. It is of course possible that it took his heirs 15 years before they had this part of his work published posthumously, but as I cannot find any other reference so far as to where the term was published, by whom, and when, my first guess is that someone did not do his homework when he made a statement to this effect in the article. A reliable source is needed here, perhaps accompanied by a link to the first place of publication. Wiki klaas 16:12, 2 February 2015 (UTC)
Although preceded by Linnaeus's system in Systema Naturae (10th edition, 1758) and unpublished work by Bernard and Antoine Laurent de Jussieu, the notion of a unit-based "natural system" of biological classification was first made widely available in 1805 through the publication, as the introduction to the third edition of Jean-Baptiste Lamarck's Flore françoise, of Augustin Pyramus de Candolle's Principes élémentaires de botanique, an exposition of a system for the "natural classification" of plants.
This is an ideal scholarly sentence in many respects, and almost a work of art in compact register.
It just isn't right for Wikipedia, and the attention span of the average reader.
Sure, this is an eighth-grade reading level: but only in Starfleet Academy. — MaxEnt 21:04, 18 February 2019 (UTC)
Agree! Shorter sentences, straightforward words/and or include definitions or link. Peacedance ( talk) 23:25, 10 March 2019 (UTC)
Request for clarification on unit, but really the entire first paragraph and perhaps lead needs a rewrite.
– A unit of *what*?
– What are these units based on? (earlier physical attributes, later evolution/genomics?)
– "Population" sounds geographical. Sometimes this is the case, but not always – is another more generic word better?
– There is no hint here that a taxon can be of different levels.
How about a little context, very briefly for the lead, how did they get started, why are they continued?
There are no examples to even give the reader a *hint*.
I am a sociologist and would like to better understand the basics of taxonomy, cladistics, etc., but I really can't with the way that the articles are at this point. The introductions, at least, need to be written while imagining that the audience is a **general reader knows nothing about the topic**. That doesn't mean it can't be stuffed with fascinating information, but it does mean that terms should be defined, context and brief examples provided so the reader knows what the heck you are talking about. That also doesn't mean that the article can't get into more sophisticated detail later in the article.
I know more about this than I am implying, and could try to rewrite it myself, but I don't know enough to ensure that I am not making subtle mistakes that are misleading.
But help out the rest of us in the lead! Please! Peacedance ( talk) 23:25, 10 March 2019 (UTC)
The animal classification image shows nine things, while the description says 'eight'. Fix the spelling error to make sure that it matches. 111.88.15.221 ( talk) 17:00, 27 October 2019 (UTC)
Le plus important serait le taxon lazare un sous claque comme la Queen . Et mickeal jackson je nais pas vue et le super classe . Order classe . Reptilien mais seulement des lignéa sang pure . Mon ami est sous classe mais lazare revenue 2005 . . Il est différent. Que vous être. Oui je suis content . . 70.55.128.180 ( talk) 21:04, 19 December 2021 (UTC)