Talk:Snake (animal): Difference between revisions

From Citizendium
Jump to navigation Jump to search
imported>Nancy Sculerati MD
No edit summary
m (Pat Palmer moved page Talk:Snake to Talk:Snake (animal) without leaving a redirect)
 
(10 intermediate revisions by 6 users not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
{{subpages}}
Beginning to rewrite this article with 2 goals in mind: (1) using language that maintains the interest of the general reader and (2) fitting the subject into biological science. Please join me![[User:Nancy Sculerati MD|Nancy Sculerati MD]] 09:58, 29 January 2007 (CST)
Beginning to rewrite this article with 2 goals in mind: (1) using language that maintains the interest of the general reader and (2) fitting the subject into biological science. Please join me![[User:Nancy Sculerati MD|Nancy Sculerati MD]] 09:58, 29 January 2007 (CST)


Removed line about "old synonym for snakes". It's perfectly acceptable to call a snake a sepent, this is a current synonym. [[User:Nancy Sculerati MD|Nancy Sculerati MD]] 10:05, 29 January 2007 (CST)
Removed line about "old synonym for snakes". It's perfectly acceptable to call a snake a serpent, this is a current synonym. [[User:Nancy Sculerati MD|Nancy Sculerati MD]] 10:05, 29 January 2007 (CST)
 
== Format: Derivation and use of word/triple line/Body of article ==
 
I would like to make a case for adopting this as Citizendium style. I think it has the advantage of keeping all the word origin and use stuff, but- especially if it became standard and users would learn that the actual article starts after the triple line- not muddying up the introduction with this stuff. [[User:Nancy Sculerati MD|Nancy Sculerati MD]] 10:09, 29 January 2007 (CST)
 
----
 
As I am editing this article I am finding a number of direct quotation from sources that are not placed in quotes and are not referenced. Therefore, I am deleting them as I go. No original research does ''not'' mean no original writing ;-) !![[User:Nancy Sculerati MD|Nancy Sculerati MD]] 10:17, 29 January 2007 (CST)
 
== Why is this a redirect? ==
 
This should just be at [[snake]]. John was right to redirect to the only existing article, but it shouldn't be necessary, and even if it were, why snake(''organism'') - highly bookish word in this context - 'reptile' or even 'animal' would be better.
 
This is one of the clearer-cut cases where the article should just live at the noun. Other meanings of 'snake' are clearly named from their resemblance to the reptile.
 
[[User:Aleta Curry|Aleta Curry]] 11:13, 12 May 2012 (UTC)

Latest revision as of 14:15, 8 March 2024

This article is developing and not approved.
Main Article
Discussion
Related Articles  [?]
Bibliography  [?]
External Links  [?]
Citable Version  [?]
Catalogs [?]
 
To learn how to update the categories for this article, see here. To update categories, edit the metadata template.
 Definition Elongated legless carnivorous reptile of the suborder Serpentes, order Squamata, abundant in all warm countries. [d] [e]
Checklist and Archives
 Workgroup category Biology [Categories OK]
 Subgroup category:  Zoology
 Talk Archive none  English language variant British English

Beginning to rewrite this article with 2 goals in mind: (1) using language that maintains the interest of the general reader and (2) fitting the subject into biological science. Please join me!Nancy Sculerati MD 09:58, 29 January 2007 (CST)

Removed line about "old synonym for snakes". It's perfectly acceptable to call a snake a serpent, this is a current synonym. Nancy Sculerati MD 10:05, 29 January 2007 (CST)

Format: Derivation and use of word/triple line/Body of article

I would like to make a case for adopting this as Citizendium style. I think it has the advantage of keeping all the word origin and use stuff, but- especially if it became standard and users would learn that the actual article starts after the triple line- not muddying up the introduction with this stuff. Nancy Sculerati MD 10:09, 29 January 2007 (CST)


As I am editing this article I am finding a number of direct quotation from sources that are not placed in quotes and are not referenced. Therefore, I am deleting them as I go. No original research does not mean no original writing ;-) !!Nancy Sculerati MD 10:17, 29 January 2007 (CST)

Why is this a redirect?

This should just be at snake. John was right to redirect to the only existing article, but it shouldn't be necessary, and even if it were, why snake(organism) - highly bookish word in this context - 'reptile' or even 'animal' would be better.

This is one of the clearer-cut cases where the article should just live at the noun. Other meanings of 'snake' are clearly named from their resemblance to the reptile.

Aleta Curry 11:13, 12 May 2012 (UTC)