Edge Rewrite
// HTMLRewriter · presentation

This page was redesigned at the edge.

Cloudflare fetched the original article and streamed it through HTMLRewriter to apply an entirely new visual system without rebuilding the source page.

// request.cf · coarse context

A page that knows where it met you.

Only coarse request metadata is shown. This demo does not display or persist visitor IP addresses.

Country
US
Cloudflare location
CMH
Connection
HTTP/2
Language
Not provided

Ray ID: a23847c89d57910d

Jump to content

Talk:Biotic material

Page contents not supported in other languages.
Add topic
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Latest comment: 7 years ago by Cvereb in topic Organic vs. biotic

Organic vs. biotic

[edit]

I rewrote the paragraph on soil science slightly. See the Talk:Organic_material; also, clamshells are not low in carbon, they are low in organic carbon (they are made of calcium carbonate). Ventifact 04:01, 14 September 2006 (UTC)Reply

oops. good point —Pengo talk · contribs 08:04, 14 September 2006 (UTC)Reply

I propose we merge biotic material into bio-based material, and then rename the resultant article something like "Uses of biological materials", as part of a major reshuffle of articles. Please feel free to join in the discussion here. Thanks :) Anxietycello (talk) 02:46, 9 July 2008 (UTC).Reply

I think that the current lead of the bio-based material article differentiates the terms nicely and corresponds with my experience of real-world usage:

A bio-based material is simply an engineering material made from substances derived from living matter. These materials are sometimes referred to as biomaterials, but this word also has another meaning. Strictly the definition could include many common materials such as wood and leather, but it typically refers to modern materials that have undergone more extensive processing. Unprocessed materials may be called biotic material.

I strongly oppose a retitling to Uses of biological materials, although I suppose you could start a different article of that title, that would be more inclusive than either existing article. Such an article would logically include food. ike9898 (talk) 01:43, 13 July 2008 (UTC)Reply

With the Panspermia theory now gaining acceptance, it becomes more than ever important for WIKIPEDIA to better define Biological Organics versus Non-Biological Organics.

BSmith821 (talk) 05:08, 19 July 2013 (UTC)Reply

Actually, I would suggest to merge this article (a stub), along with Bio-based material into the parent article: Biomaterial. I may do a formal proposal before proceeding. Cheers, BatteryIncluded (talk) 16:25, 20 July 2013 (UTC)Reply
Biomaterial seems to have a completely different meaning (high-tech materials engineered to interact with biological systems). But I see two articles Biotic material and Biogenic substance without a clearly defined difference. Those should probably be merged. Cvereb (talk) 11:50, 16 December 2018 (UTC)Reply