Talk:Nuclear envelope: Difference between revisions
Content deleted Content added
No edit summary |
m Automatically signing comment made by 170.185.38.19 |
||
| Line 3: | Line 3: | ||
:I wouldn't redirect nuclear lamina to nuclear envelope, based on the fact that only the animal nuclear envelope has a true nuclear lamina. Also, this article is completely missing information on the plant nuclear envelope, e.g. its role as MTOC in mitosis. - [[User:Tameeria|tameeria]] 01:39, 10 February 2007 (UTC) |
:I wouldn't redirect nuclear lamina to nuclear envelope, based on the fact that only the animal nuclear envelope has a true nuclear lamina. Also, this article is completely missing information on the plant nuclear envelope, e.g. its role as MTOC in mitosis. - [[User:Tameeria|tameeria]] 01:39, 10 February 2007 (UTC) |
||
as i descoverd a new way to breed the cells i aslo dicoverd that it makes u vary horny |
as i descoverd a new way to breed the cells i aslo dicoverd that it makes u vary horny <small>—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/170.185.38.19|170.185.38.19]] ([[User talk:170.185.38.19|talk]]) 15:01, 20 September 2007 (UTC)</small><!-- Template:UnsignedIP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> |
||
Revision as of 15:03, 20 September 2007
Template:Wikiproject MCB I moved part of the paragraph on the nuclear lamina to the actual nuclear lamina article. There's also the possibility of redirecting the nuclear lamina article to this one...--Kinglz 21:21, 8 Jun 2005 (UTC)
- I wouldn't redirect nuclear lamina to nuclear envelope, based on the fact that only the animal nuclear envelope has a true nuclear lamina. Also, this article is completely missing information on the plant nuclear envelope, e.g. its role as MTOC in mitosis. - tameeria 01:39, 10 February 2007 (UTC)
as i descoverd a new way to breed the cells i aslo dicoverd that it makes u vary horny —Preceding unsigned comment added by 170.185.38.19 (talk) 15:01, 20 September 2007 (UTC)