Talk:Evolution

From Wikinfo

This article contains much good information, but needs to be reorganized to first present a straightforward, basic, sympathetic, presentation of evolution, probably historically. More complicated information about recent developments can be presented in a later or separate section. Critical discussions, attacks on , and defense of validity can be in yet another section , or different article. If this meets with a consensus, there would be an obvious period of confusion. Who were the original authors? Are they available for detailed editing and reorganization.Stsimonssage 11:05, 8 Jun 2006 (EDT)

The article was imported back in 2003 by Fred, and you're the only one who has made any edits since then. Essentially you should go ahead and make whatever changes you think are necessary, and I think SPOVing the article is a good idea and moving the more critical data to its proper article. Neo 12:16, 8 Jun 2006 (EDT)

Assuming that the 2003 article was from Wikipedia, I have reviewed again the Wikinfo article and the current Wikipedia aticle. The latter is much improved, but still suffers many of the organizational flaws that I alluded to in the first comment. The current WP article(a too long 21 printed pages) would be easier to edit requiring less original writing.Is there any reason, not to import the current WP article? I'm not expert at importing, and would not be offended if someone else wanted to do that, placing it after the recently edited intro of the Wikinfo article. The Talk page in WP is a disaster and should not be imported.Stsimonssage 16:32, 9 Jun 2006 (EDT)----

To import it easily you need to delete the current page, but I will bring in the current version for you to work on. FJB 21:29, 9 Jun 2006 (EDT)

Thanks to FJB for the import. I have made some crude deletions to remove material that is already in separate articles like the discussion of other scientific disciplines, the fossil record, paleoclimatology, etc. Also the material that invites philosophical and religious controversies has been removed. Much of this article is devoted to post-Mendelian developments, and is too sophisticated for an introductory article. Eventually, a separate and detailed article on Genetics should be prepared or may already exist. I am not volunteering. Now, I would like to focus on the early Darwin, and natural selection, which may take some time, and come in segments.Stsimonssage 16:32, 10 Jun 2006 (EDT)

Wikinfo has articles on August Weissman ; Thomas Hunt Morgan; Ronald Ficher Jean-Baptiste Lamarck, Alfred Russell Wallace,. Probably the WP articles on Charles Darwin should be imported. Stsimonssage 17:10, 10 Jun 2006 (EDT)

I sought to begin editing by typing in the introductory material from the Winkinfo article. But it does not show up after saving page. What's the story? I got the message about 70 something and need to delete other material. I did so but it made no difference. The warning sign went away. Help!! Stsimonssage 17:13, 10 Jun 2006 (EDT)

Sounds like it didn't save - either there was an internet traffic jam or you clicked "show preview" instead? -proteus 13:18, 11 Jun 2006 (EDT)

24hrs later the edit page will not save. I've gone through the process many times without success. I have got a few signals. One said "OOPS, the Wikinfo can not contact the server". That was helpful at least. Also the page is down to 66 kbytes, but still has a warning that editing may have to be done in sections. Some other strange things have come up, and the slowness of the signal is a sure sign that it won't work. Stsimonssage 16:27, 12 Jun 2006 (EDT)

Sorry you're having trouble, but it sounds like your internet connection, in terms of provider, routed gateways, wireless connectivity, etc. It's not the wiki per se, but sometimes our host, ibiblio, has capacity issues. -proteus 18:26, 12 Jun 2006 (EDT)

I concur w/Proteus sometimes ibiblio has problems and occasionally goes down.WHEELER 19:28, 12 Jun 2006 (EDT)

Storm crashed computer after writing long note yesterday. I took a grim reaper to the WP article and removed a lot of inappropriate material too advanced for reasonably informed reader, usually about genetics.I think one problem was that the "edit" sections on the WP article didn't work, and the entire article had to be managed in one piece. Can anyone remove the 4-5 words just outside the upper left corner of the image? The table of contents is no longer appropriate, can some one remove that? Or tell me how to. I will need to do a lot of reading in order to write an almost complete article. Patience !!! Stsimonssage 14:14, 14 Jun 2006 (EDT)

Thanks for straightening out the beginning format. Looks good and reads coherently even if references are completely distroyed.Let's let it stand for a while. I'm trying to write something using Origin of the Species as the major source.I've made a decent start, but much more to do, and then there will need to be a major editing and condensation. Stsimonssage 10:44, 20 Jun 2006 (EDT)

New Segment

It's not exactly what I planned, but an expedient compromise. It's relatively brief, and reasonably true to Darwin. The text and references are basically finished. I can't correct line spacing problems throughout much of the text, particularly near or around sentences or ends of sentences with superscripts.More experienced editing should solve. Tell me how you do it. All other editing and formatting help appreciated.

I'll look at it. FJB 13:29, 23 Jun 2006 (EDT)

What do you think should happen to the old material that comes after the References. Though fragmented and not referenced, it is accurate, and not un interesting. Some of it should or may already be in Genetics or Gregor Mendel.

Redundency is good. FJB 13:29, 23 Jun 2006 (EDT)

The original plan was that there might be up to three separate articles.I have provided Evolution or Natural Selection 101, and have no interest in the theological objections. Right now I'm a little tired of evolution, and I am not volunteering for Biological Evolution 303. I was on my way to another article when all this came up. Stsimonssage 11:41, 23 Jun 2006 (EDT)

Sounds good. FJB 13:29, 23 Jun 2006 (EDT)

I see what is causing the line spacing problem.The superscript numbers are large and intrude on the line above forcing a line space. I have used superscripts before without that occuring. ???? May just have to write all of them over.Stsimonssage 13:28, 24 Jun 2006 (EDT)

Rewriting didn't help. Stsimonssage 13:40, 24 Jun 2006 (EDT)

I've exhausted all my ideas for changing size of numbers or line spacing. The old material looks better and better where it is or as a the major part of the second article. Some minor bit of writing could probably provide a transition from one article to another.Stsimonssage 12:34, 26 Jun 2006 (EDT)

Brainstorm!! Changed superscripts to [1] as example.Hope this satisfies WI formatting rules. I looked far and wide in Manuals of Style and Editing of WP for answers including other models for footnotes. Couldn't find anything.

On several occasions, the beginning of the article has been in an attractive format with the text running continuously down the side of the tree image. But more often than not, there is an orphan first word "The" at the top of the image. So far I have not been able to fix.Stsimonssage 12:34, 26 Jun 2006 (EDT)

I can't reproduce this on any of my browsers. FJB 19:15, 26 Jun 2006 (EDT)

I think it is fixed.Stsimonssage 19:05, 27 Jun 2006 (EDT)

My resources for adding anything worthwhile for a practical effort to B.E.II are exhausted. I had hoped to elaborate on the inheritance issue, and maybe on the more recent findings on the "origin of life". Referring to Genetics, and to Gregor Mendel is a better solution to the inheritance.The "Orgin of Life" topic probably deserves a separate article. Stsimonssage 11:53, 4 Jul 2006 (EDT)

Formatting

Everything on my screen looks as though it were written in the caption of the phylum tree image. How can this be fixed?Dio 15:09, 18 Nov 2006 (EST)

]] at the end of the caption. Fred 18:12, 18 Nov 2006 (EST)