Talk:Tribe (biology)

Tree of Life Mid‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Tree of Life, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of taxonomy and the phylogenetic tree of life on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Tree of LifeWikipedia:WikiProject Tree of LifeTemplate:WikiProject Tree of Lifetaxonomic articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Biology Mid‑importance

	Biology portal Tribe (biology) is part of the WikiProject Biology, an effort to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to biology on Wikipedia. Leave messages on the WikiProject talk page.BiologyWikipedia:WikiProject BiologyTemplate:WikiProject BiologyBiology articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

This is stupid and pointless to have as a separate article. Stan 18:48, 2 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Agreed. These pages had been made redirects a long time ago, and were reverted for little apparent reason. Since no justification has been provided, and they can always be recreated in the event that some new information shows up, I'm pointing them to scientific classification again. Josh 23:50, 9 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Is this the "discussion" to which Josh constantly refers? Two people. TWO PEOPLE! --Node 02:49, 18 Oct 2004 (UTC)

But two people who actually know something about the subject, which makes a difference, plus none of the other taxo-knowledgeable people who've seen this have objected. Stan 04:51, 18 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Node, if you look at the history, this is a comment on your unexplained reversion of the page. As I said on your user page, the original discussion happened a long time ago and is probably lost. But I tried to explain the reasons why these pages shouldn't be separate, pointed out you haven't given any justification for keeping them, and only undid the reverts after waiting for one. I guess now you've said it's hard to edit redirects, so your word should be taken as final? After all, you're ONE PERSON, and are plainly going to do whatever you want. Josh

Anybody notice that they say there are 8 major taxonomic ranks, but the picture shows that there are 9?TheInprovementMan. —Preceding unsigned comment added by TheInprovementMan (talk • contribs) 21:59, 22 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I suppose "Life" is not intended to be a rank. Ucucha 06:50, 23 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

New section on Rank recognition

If my new section on Rank recognition sounds to your ear more like it was written by a computer scientist than a biologist, then I commend you on your keen perception. I wrote this precisely because I'm unfamiliar with almost every taxonomic convention.

My assertions were assiduously cribbed from a expansive and convenient authority: other Wikipedia page. But this only goes so far in the eyes of a complete novice, so proofread accordingly.

Please fix my bugs, but try not to dig my useful perspective from beginner's eyes too far into the presumptive subsoil. — MaxEnt 16:36, 19 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]