Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Introduction to evolution: Difference between revisions
Content deleted Content added
m →Introduction to evolution: corrected edit of my text by another writer |
|||
Line 561:
:::* The structure of DNA is referred to as the double helix. -- I do not think the author of this sentence intended to imply that helical shape was exclusive or even the primary force behind heredity. I didn't read it that way. It is a commonly used descriptive term for DNA. If it should become a major point of contention; then I suggest dropping "double helix structure" and just say'' they described the structure of DNA''; rather than increasing complexity in that passage. Going into the base pairing rules might be a tad off topic; perhaps best linked out. Would simply deleting the statement double helix structure achieve the same goal without the need to swing toward increased complexity? --[[User:Random Replicator|Random Replicator]] ([[User talk:Random Replicator|talk]]) 21:08, 27 January 2008 (UTC)
::::The double helix is commonly known, the only problem was implying, by the sentence, that this is what Watson and Crick's major breakthrough in the biological sciences was. Most of what we do today in the biological sciences is due to the insight of Watson and Crick into the base pairing. The problem is raising the double helix to the level of one of the most important breakthroughs in the biological sciences when it pales in comparison to what their published insight into the base pairing does. I don't think the sentences about the base pairing G-C A-T have added anything to the article or are necessary to an article of this nature. But Waston and Crick should be clarified because that little sentence in this one tiny article is the foundation of a new era in science, and in evolutionary science, and the double helix, as important and interesting as it is, is not the same thing. --[[User:Amaltheus|Amaltheus]] ([[User talk:Amaltheus|talk]]) 21:17, 27 January 2008 (UTC)
::::: I ask then --- will dropping the double helix structure from the text be adequate to your concerns so that I may delete the newly added information? I'm trying to lean toward simplicity on this one. --[[User:Random Replicator|Random Replicator]] ([[User talk:Random Replicator|talk]]) 21:29, 27 January 2008 (UTC)
| |||