Talk:Coalescent theory
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
I've just been adding information to Coalescence (genetics) and then came across this page. Personally I feel that the two pages should probably be merged into one article as they are essentially covering the same ground.
What existed at Coalescence (genetics) before the changes I added today was really just a very brief primer of this page, and the whole disambiguation of coalescence should point to this document.
Thoughts and discussion on the merits of doing this, and appropriate structure would be more than welcome.
Slack---line 02:53, 9 January 2007 (UTC)
- I wrote most of coalescent theory, and I'm inclined to agree; there's no need for two articles on essentially the same subject. You've done some very good work so far; they shouldn't be too difficult to combine, especially your much more extensive reference list. Opabinia regalis 03:58, 9 January 2007 (UTC)
-
- Okay, I shall wait a few days and see if there are any comments added to the discussion on coalescence (genetics) before merging the two. In the mean time I'll bulk things out there.
-
- Any thoughts on structure for the merged document?
-
- Suggested sections would be..
-
-
- Overview
- Theory (Probability of Fixation/Time to Coalescence/Neutrality/Extensions)
- Graphical Representation
- Applications (Phylogeneny/Disease gene mapping)
- Software (Simulation/Analysis)
- History
- References
- Links
-
-
- Slack---line 00:50, 10 January 2007 (UTC)
-
-
- This suggestion sounds very good. Just to note, the general convention here is to place what is effectively an "overview", referred to as the lead section, at the top of the article before the first heading. Then you'd put headings for "theory" and subsequent sections. Normally, the subject of the article is in bold text early in the lead. (ie, the format currently used by coalescence theory.)
-
-
-
- Feel free to wait if you want, but also feel free to be bold; these pages don't get much traffic. Opabinia regalis 03:16, 10 January 2007 (UTC)
-
Went ahead and did the merge (bored at work as I've nothing to do), all seems to have gone smoothly. Some sections are currently blank, but I'll endeavour to gradually help bulk this out as time permits. Slack---line 05:18, 10 January 2007 (UTC)