Talk:Gregor Mendel

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

This page sounds like an argument[edit]

Like too many wikipedia articles, this page looks like an argument between opposite points of views nobody really cares about. To a reader who wants to know about Mendel it is not so relevant if scientists independently rediscovered Mendel's work or not, and if consensus cannot be reached neither claim should be made. Please guys, act like grown-ups. Squid I will give you $99999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999


this is a good article about mendel

Please upload more detailed and accurate information about Mendel (Squid loves genetics)

Semi-protected edit request on 16 February 2016[edit]

In the Section "Experiments on Plant Hybridization", Para 1, Sentence 5 Please change "Between 1856 and 1863 Mendel cultivated and tested some 28,000 plants, majority of which were pea plants" to "Between 1856 and 1863 Mendel and two assistants cultivated and tested some 28,000 plants, majority of which were pea plants". The original implies that Gregor Mendel did this work on his own. This is not credible given the work involved in making a single cross. This minor change will correct this.

Reference, Rice,S.A., Infobase Publishing, 2009, Encyclopedia of Evolution, , 267 'The monastery provided Mendel with two full-time assistants to help him with his research.'

No chek.svg Not necessary. Scientific achievements are not normally credited to the scientist's helpers, assistants, or students, as long as the research is owned by the scientist. In this case, it was Mendel's alone. And it is not particularly interesting to know some anonymous assistants. Chhandama (talk) 04:51, 17 February 2016 (UTC)
Fair enough. Just that there is a common misperception that Mendel did all the work himself in his spare time. Have even encountered this in books. (talk) 14:23, 17 February 2016 (UTC)

I have the same concern as the original poster. Wikipedia is used widely as a reference by students in primary and secondary education who would certainly misconstrue the statement that "Mendel cultivated and tested 28,000 plants". I think the suggested edit does no harm and will prevent a common misunderstanding. - (talk) 14:05, 18 February 2017 (UTC)

-- (talk) 15:16, 7 October 2016 (UTC)== External links modified ==

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 2 external links on Gregor Mendel. Please take a moment to review my edit. You may add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it, if I keep adding bad data, but formatting bugs should be reported instead. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether, but should be used as a last resort. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

YesY An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

If you are unable to use these tools, you may set |needhelp=<your help request> on this template to request help from an experienced user. Please include details about your problem, to help other editors.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 19:52, 29 March 2016 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 13 July 2016[edit]


This line in the current page: "He became a friar because it enabled him to obtain an education without having to pay for it himself [7]" is overly reductive. The truth is that there is no objective evidence as to why Mendel chose his vocation as priest. It cannot be said that it merely was due to the prospect of continuing his education "without having to pay for it himself." In light of his being made Abbot of the monastery, one may speculate that he was a priest with a special pastoral charism ("Abbot," after all, is derived from "father").

I see that the typical format of these requests is to "change X to Y," but I think it's in the best interest to omit this line entirely because as of now it adds a detail that isn't verifiable or seemingly true. It would be too much to add any detail into why he professed vows in the Augustinian order. It is more objective to simply mention that he indeed professed vows in the Augustinian order. Unless there is some very good source specifying why, there is no point in mentioning. To mention anything seems inaccurate, among other things.

The Catholic encyclopedia (a resource that would've been interested in his priesthood) doesn't mention anything specific either:

"At the former place one of his teachers was an Augustinian, and, whether post or propter hoc, at the end of his period of study at the gymnasium Mendel applied to be admitted as a novice in the Abbey of St. Thomas at Brünn, commonly known as the 'Königskloster'" - From the Catholic Encyclopedia:

SamuelAidan (talk) 20:29, 13 July 2016 (UTC)

Red information icon with gradient background.svg Not done: please establish a consensus for this alteration before using the {{edit semi-protected}} template.  B E C K Y S A Y L E 03:25, 14 July 2016 (UTC)

Ethnic ancestry[edit]

Previous edits claimed Mendel as an ethnic Moravian/implied Czech. The references cited were in Czech or blanked web pages. As a well researched and documented book shows, Mendel had ethnic German ancestors. The info has been changed. Tapered (talk) 00:24, 8 November 2016 (UTC)

Misleading statement about crosses.[edit]

In the second paragraph we have the sentence "With seed color, he showed that when a yellow pea and a green pea were bred together their offspring plant was always yellow". This is only true if the yellow peas and green peas are true-breeding. If the yellow peas are not true-breeding you might get some green peas. I don't know how this should be edited because it probably would be too early in the article to introduce true-breeding (heterozygous,homozygous). Maybe we can defer the example to further down in the article and include the term true-breeding. (talk) 17:36, 19 February 2017 (UTC)