This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.
This article is or was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 28 January 2019 and 17 May 2019. Further details are available on the course page. Assigned student editor(s): Zain1k99.
The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.
Light-independent reactions → Calvin cycle – In the article "calvin cycle" is used a lot more than "light independant reactions"(26 mentions for "calvin cycle", 2 for "light independent reactions"). The redirect page Calvin Cycle has significantly more internal links than the primary page with 22 links for light independent reactions, many of which are to avoid redirects while not appearing in prose, compared to 89 directly to "Calvin cycle" not including "Calvin Cycle" and "Calvin-Bensson cycle" or other calvin cycle derived names. To avoid confusion and better follow WP:LEAST this page should be moved to "Calvin cycle".
)) Trialpears (talk) 08:02, 2 April 2019 (UTC)
Support. Pubmed gives 235 hits for "Calvin cycle" in the last 5 years (and 32 for ""Calvin-Benson cycle"), but only 15 for "light-independent reactions". (I get different numbers searching from home or uni, but the trend is the same.) My 2015 biology textbook (Campbell Biology) uses "Calvin cycle" as the primary term. I also prefer "Calvin cycle" because the current title is misleading, given that these reactions depend on NADPH and ATP from the light reactions, so are not light independent. Pinging Tpswain who commented above, and Opabinia regalis who I'm sure has commented on this before. Adrian J. Hunter(talk•contribs) 06:45, 3 April 2019 (UTC)
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.
Good to see this! Sorry, I saw the ping awhile back but forgot to follow up. Anyway, belated +1, just in case this issue comes up again in the future. Has been needed for awhile now. Opabinia regalis (talk) 05:18, 21 April 2019 (UTC)
I've restored a section header that was vandalised away, which I noticed as "Coupling to other metabolic pathways" seems like a non-sequitur and shouldn't hold the bulk of the text. I've left the restored section with the title "Calvin cycle" as the section text bolds and describes the Calvin cycle again, which hopefully someone with more knowledge than me can iron out. 93 (talk) 21:14, 29 May 2019 (UTC)