Talk:History of genetics
|Summaries of this article appear in gene and genetics.|
|WikiProject Genetics||(Rated C-class, High-importance)|
|WikiProject History of Science||(Rated C-class, High-importance)|
The current version of this page is what we would call in the field the "scientist's view of history" -- teleological, Whig history, etc. For those looking to expand this, I highly recommend Peter J. Bowler's, The Mendelian Revolution, which does a much better job at explaining the history of genetics in a non-teleological sense. Very accessible book, written for non-specialists by a well-respected historian of biology. --Fastfission 17:48, 7 February 2006 (UTC)
Referencing with inline calls
Some referencing with inline citations could help this article ☤'ProfBrumby 17:59, 17 October 2007 (UTC)
Modern Evolution of Genetics Timeline should be merged here. The purpose of that article is pretty much covered here, plus the title and concept is all un-Wikipedia-like. — Jeraphine Gryphon (talk) 13:10, 24 November 2012 (UTC)
- Support - the MEGT article has quite a bit of detail not found here, and it often gives more detail than on items here, so some effort will be needed in the merge (including maybe adding detail to items covered here but not there, for evenness), but the intention of the two articles is certainly very similar. Chiswick Chap (talk) 20:09, 14 January 2013 (UTC)
- This is not a forum for discussion of personal opinions. We are simply deciding on an article merge, to which those comments have no relevance. Chiswick Chap (talk) 19:33, 30 January 2013 (UTC)
Orphaned references in History of genetics
I check pages listed in Category:Pages with incorrect ref formatting to try to fix reference errors. One of the things I do is look for content for orphaned references in wikilinked articles. I have found content for some of History of genetics's orphans, the problem is that I found more than one version. I can't determine which (if any) is correct for this article, so I am asking for a sentient editor to look it over and copy the correct ref content into this article.
Reference named "Pearson_2006":
- From Gene: Pearson H (May 2006). "Genetics: what is a gene?". Nature 441 (7092): 398–401. Bibcode:2006Natur.441..398P. doi:10.1038/441398a. PMID 16724031.
- From Genetics: Pearson, H (2006). "Genetics: what is a gene?". Nature 441 (7092): 398–401. Bibcode:2006Natur.441..398P. doi:10.1038/441398a. PMID 16724031.
I apologize if any of the above are effectively identical; I am just a simple computer program, so I can't determine whether minor differences are significant or not. AnomieBOT⚡ 01:32, 16 April 2015 (UTC)