This article is within the scope of WikiProject Food and drink, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of food and drink related articles 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.Food and drinkWikipedia:WikiProject Food and drinkTemplate:WikiProject Food and drinkFood and drink articles
Delete unrelated trivia sections found in articles. Please review WP:Trivia and WP:Handling trivia to learn how to do this.
Add the {{WikiProject Food and drink}} project banner to food and drink related articles and content to help bring them to the attention of members. For a complete list of banners for WikiProject Food and drink and its child projects, select here.
Hi, Chiswick Chap. Regarding this? Do you mind explaining why you removed WP:Biology? I certainly don't consider the topic just a food and drink topic.
Do as you think right on the basis of the evidence. I checked carefully, and the term is really not used by biologists other than as a common metaphor (putting flesh on the bones of a theory, etc). If you have reliable evidence to the contrary, describe and cite it in the article and put the WP back. All the best, Chiswick Chap (talk) 08:12, 4 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Chiswick Chap, I know that there isn't much to state on this topic. I looked for sources on it years ago. I'm just saying that it does concern biology, as seen by what was in the article before and what is currently in the article, and that it may be of interest to some biology editors. One or more editors from WP:Biology may be able to improve the article in some way. My opinion on the article today is that the page should simply be tagged with Template:Wiktionary redirect. Flyer22 Frozen (talk) 04:44, 6 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Regarding this edit by Johnbod, it does clarify that this article is about the term. I noted with this edit that I "was going to remove the 'is a term for' wording per WP:ISAWORDFOR and WP:Refers to because the article is not about a term. But it was presented as a terminology matter before Johnbod's edit." So, Chiswick Chap and others, I guess this is a term article? If we are agreed that this is what it is, it should be put in a terminology category. We should also keep what WP:WORDISSUBJECT states in mind. And, above, I did question whether we even need an article on this matter. Flyer22 Frozen (talk) 00:26, 8 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
No, it doesn't. That's especially the case when there are numerous meanings in different areas, as here. I suppose it is a "term" article. What it isn't is an article on a valid concept in areas of biology, except perhaps mycology? Johnbod (talk) 16:42, 8 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
