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: a21b7b06fb51c60e

Jump to content

Talk:Botany

Page contents not supported in other languages.
Add topic
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Good articleBotany 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.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
June 2, 2012Good article nomineeListed
September 7, 2013Peer reviewReviewed
September 16, 2013Featured article candidateNot promoted
Current status: Good article

Plant biology vs botany

[edit]

I believe the name of the article should be "Plant biology" rather than Botany. As a biologist I come across the first term more. I can defend my argument by pubmed search; thus search for "plant biology" yields 29000 results; whereas botany gives only 7000 results; Not that I prefer plant biology personally, botany is nice name enough but that's the trend in science now; Better proof would be probably searching for scientific journals mentioning the corresponding names. Araz Zeyniyev (talk) 09:08, 23 November 2023 (UTC)Reply

Wiki Education assignment: Principles of Ecology

[edit]

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 29 August 2024 and 12 December 2024. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): JayG05 (article contribs).

— Assignment last updated by JayG05 (talk) 15:09, 24 September 2024 (UTC)Reply

Discussion on improving the lead paragraph (for general information)

[edit]

WP editors User:Smartse and User:Davidbena recently discussed the lead paragraph and whether or not it should be expanded by citing an antiquated source taken from Encyclopædia Britannica (1823). A link to that discussion can be seen here. This is solely for general information.Davidbena (talk) 14:23, 9 January 2025 (UTC)Reply

More symbols

[edit]

Found these on Commons; can anyone verify if they are (still) used?

Some of them cite this 2010 journal article. They could also be listed as proposed, if notable?

-- Beland (talk) 09:39, 14 December 2025 (UTC)Reply

"Biology symbols" listed at Redirects for discussion

[edit]

The redirect Biology symbols has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2026 May 1 § Biology symbols until a consensus is reached. Myceteae🍄‍🟫 (talk) 19:48, 1 May 2026 (UTC)Reply