Talk:Fertilisation

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

	MCB Portal This article is within the scope of the Molecular and Cellular Biology WikiProject. To participate, visit the WikiProject for more information. The current monthly improvement drive is Signal transduction.
Start	This article has been rated as start-Class on the assessment scale.
Top	This article is on a subject of top-importance within molecular and cellular biology.
Article Grading: The following comments were left by the quality and importance raters: (edit · refresh) Rated "top" as topic of general interest. This article needs expansion, clarification of plant fertilization (e.g. flowering plants, non-flowering plants, algae etc.), addition of fungi (fertilization via plasmogamy, growth as dikaryon, and karyogamy) etc. - tameeria 04:54, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

Regarding the use of fertilisation on this page, this is copied from Wikipedia:Manual of Style#National varieties of English:

• Articles should use the same dialect throughout.
• If an article's subject has a strong tie to a specific region/dialect, it should use that dialect.
• If there's no strong tie, try to find synonyms that can be used in any dialect.
• If no such words can be agreed upon, the dialect of the first significant contributor (not a stub) should be used.

In this case the first significant contribution used fertilisation and so that is what is used throughout this article.

Contents 1 Term controversy 2 Non-mammals 3 Vandalism 4 Plant 5 science 6 Headline text

[edit] Term controversy

It should be noted that conception only ever meant embryonic implantation after the drug companies developed the first birth control pill. The pill blocks ovulation 80% of the time, but it also thins and hardens the endometrial lining of the womb, making it impossible for the embryo to implant. To deal with this situation, the FDA, several drug companies, and Dr. Alan Guttmacher held a meeting and changed the definitions of both conception and pregnancy so that they could legally market the pill as a contraceptive, rather than early abortifactent. This is the only reason behind the term controversy.

Don't give an Ameriflag 23:15, 23 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Non-mammals

Pregnancy occurs only in mammals. Does not Fertilisation apply to, say, birds?<bris changed to "fertilisation in flowering plants". Perhaps that is the best idea as the body of the text as of now only concerns flowering plants and does not make mention of many non-flowering plants that do not have double fertilisation (or many of the structures currently described).

[edit] Vandalism

<replacing text that was cut>
Wikipedia has a clear policy that the first use of either British or American spelling determines the edits thereafter. The first use on this page was in the title, which was British style (with an "s" not a "z"). Therefore the edit warriers who seek to convert it to the other convention are in violation of Wikipedia policy, ie., it is an act of vandalism. Continued warring in violation of Wikipedia policy, will result in the the perpetrators paying the consequences, including possible page protection and blocks of editors. Pollinator 04:40, 8 February 2006 (UTC)

You're right that the spelling should be left in accordance with the orignial author's version. But I'm sure this is not vandalism but rather good faith correcting of what they think are spelling errors, unless they've been gently warned and the policy you've mentioned explained to them. Peace, delldot | talk 15:50, 11 February 2006 (UTC)

Your point is well taken, but my point is that hereinafter it will be regarded as vandalism. Thanks. Pollinator 17:00, 11 February 2006 (UTC)

Sorry if I've misunderstood your position, I'm understanding you to be saying that it should be considered vandalism the first time someone does it. If that's not what you're saying, then you can ignore this. If you're saying it will be considered vandalism the first time someone does it, here are my thoughts: I hate to be pushy, but I really do feel that we should only consider edits vandalism if it's obvious (see WP:VAND: "Apparent bad-faith edits that do not make their bad-faith nature inarguably explicit are not considered vandalism at Wikipedia."). I don't think we can assume that every newbie is going to read this talk page before making what they may think is a spelling correction. And it could keep potentially good new editors from the project if we treat their edits as though they are in bad faith. So what I'm asking is that people who change the spelling be asked nicely once to stop and shown the relevant policy. After that of course, it will no longer be necessary to assume good faith. This will be more work, yes, but I'm willing to keep this page on my watchlist and do the necessary reverting and discussing when I see this happen. Does this idea sound acceptable to you? Thanks much, delldot | talk 05:04, 12 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Plant

The paragraph on plant fertilization is incomplete, and should be merged with the one on double fertilization.

The paragraphs on plant fertilization seem to indacate that all plants have flowers when this is not the case

[edit] science

[edit] Headline text

[1]garage <nurul> Image:Example.jpg|jump1 Image:Example.jpg|jump2 </nurul>kidscentral