Talk:Founder takes all: Difference between revisions
Appearance
Content deleted Content added
→Merger proposal: o, diff, needs editing |
→Merger proposal: re |
||
Line 12: | Line 12: | ||
* '''Oppose''' - overtechnicality and use of unusual terms are grounds for editing, not merger. The two topics share one word in their titles, and little else (they aren't the same effect). [[User:Chiswick Chap|Chiswick Chap]] ([[User talk:Chiswick Chap|talk]]) 07:01, 11 September 2018 (UTC) |
* '''Oppose''' - overtechnicality and use of unusual terms are grounds for editing, not merger. The two topics share one word in their titles, and little else (they aren't the same effect). [[User:Chiswick Chap|Chiswick Chap]] ([[User talk:Chiswick Chap|talk]]) 07:01, 11 September 2018 (UTC) |
||
** I wouldn't necessarily be opposed to keeping it separate. I lean merger because it's not a phrase that appears anywhere else on the site and the highly specific language makes it seem like it'd fit in better elsewhere (though if not at [[founder effect]], maybe an evolutionary biology or ecology article). FWIW the main contributors are the authors of the article describing the hypothesis. Maybe they're willing to improve/clarify it or find a better article for the content.[[User:Citing|Citing]] ([[User talk:Citing|talk]]) 13:46, 11 September 2018 (UTC) |
Revision as of 13:46, 11 September 2018
Articles for creation Stub‑class | ||||||||||
|
Evolutionary biology Stub‑class Low‑importance | ||||||||||
|
Template:Friendly search suggestions
Notability
Appears to be notable based on scholarly sources, e.g. [1], [2], [3]. ~Kvng (talk) 17:58, 17 April 2018 (UTC)
Merger proposal
This content would be better served in the article on founder effect. It's quite technical and without context it's difficult to understand. Stuff like gene surfing is casually mentioned despite that being the only mention of it on all Wikipedia.Citing (talk) 03:50, 11 September 2018 (UTC)
- Oppose - overtechnicality and use of unusual terms are grounds for editing, not merger. The two topics share one word in their titles, and little else (they aren't the same effect). Chiswick Chap (talk) 07:01, 11 September 2018 (UTC)
- I wouldn't necessarily be opposed to keeping it separate. I lean merger because it's not a phrase that appears anywhere else on the site and the highly specific language makes it seem like it'd fit in better elsewhere (though if not at founder effect, maybe an evolutionary biology or ecology article). FWIW the main contributors are the authors of the article describing the hypothesis. Maybe they're willing to improve/clarify it or find a better article for the content.Citing (talk) 13:46, 11 September 2018 (UTC)