Talk:Seed
The figure represents cypsela, indeed a fruit not a seed. Easier would be a pea seed --Penarc 01:29, 17 August 2007 (UTC)
Problems in text[change source]
There are problems when common words are used in science. For instance, plants need sunlight; yes, they obviously do need light, but as any horticulturalist will tell you it's the particular wavelengths of the light they need. They do just as well with artificial light. Obviously, one doesn't say all this, but "light" rather than "sunlight" is better science.
An even better example is saying dormant seed embryos are "asleep". Now, that's actually not true, is it? There is nothing in a plant that corresponds to sleep (see enwp). That's why the word dormant is used. My point here (and in some other science pages) is that science does need its technical terms, and if you translate them, any alternatives need to be carefully thought through. I agree with trying to make the language simpler, though not at the expense of saying things which are not literally true. And "baby" for embryo? That's too babyish for me.
Since goodwill is assumed in WP, especially from an established contributor, is is not necessary to repeat the same reference more than the content requires. Once or twice in a section might be enough. Of course, if anyone challenges a point, then extra reference might be needed. We assume that established contributors are contributing honestly. It is more important for a reference to be technically reliable than that it should be repeated several times.
For the sake of the readers, refs should be placed after, and not before, punctuation marks. The punctuation mark signals a pause at the end of a portion or reading. It belongs with the prior text; deciding whether to look for a reference is a secondary issue.
I have left much of this unchanged for the moment. Macdonald-ross (talk) 12:46, 27 January 2010 (UTC)
- You are very kind, Macdonlad-ross, and I am very relieved there are editors like you who can correct the errors of people like me. Thank you for assuming good faith and helping! I'll remember your helpful advice
Classical Esther 11:27, 28 January 2010 (UTC)
- I'm not sure about using the word coat. Perhaps a better word would be case (see wikt:case - although there are more than meaning, even as a noun) or shell (see shell - although that's a disamb page, as there is no plant link, but I feel that A shell is a hard home that protects something living inside it is a good definition for this situation). What do you guys think? I'd probably go with 'shell' as it is less ambiguous. -- PhantomSteve/talk|contribs\ 11:53, 28 January 2010 (UTC)
- Coat is the actual word used by botanists, and as it is a simple term understood by everyone (a rarity in science), we should keep it. Although the coat may be hard, it may also be quite soft, and can be creased or cut by your fingernails. 'Shell' does implies a hard covering. We have plenty to do without changing terms which are a) accurate and b) simple! I am more worried by germinate/germination. It's an essential term; I wonder if it should be a dictionary item or a brief new page? Maybe both. Macdonald-ross (talk) 12:18, 28 January 2010 (UTC)
- Thank you for explaining that - I didn't realise that coat was the proper word! With regard to 'germinate'/'germination', it's on at least 10 Wikipedias, so I think it should be one that we have a page about, but perhaps we should have a wikt: entry initially, and then create an article later? -- PhantomSteve/talk|contribs\ 13:58, 28 January 2010 (UTC)
- Yes, that seems right. If you do the wikt bit, I'll put up a shortish page on simple. Macdonald-ross (talk) 17:53, 28 January 2010 (UTC)
- Thank you for explaining that - I didn't realise that coat was the proper word! With regard to 'germinate'/'germination', it's on at least 10 Wikipedias, so I think it should be one that we have a page about, but perhaps we should have a wikt: entry initially, and then create an article later? -- PhantomSteve/talk|contribs\ 13:58, 28 January 2010 (UTC)
- Coat is the actual word used by botanists, and as it is a simple term understood by everyone (a rarity in science), we should keep it. Although the coat may be hard, it may also be quite soft, and can be creased or cut by your fingernails. 'Shell' does implies a hard covering. We have plenty to do without changing terms which are a) accurate and b) simple! I am more worried by germinate/germination. It's an essential term; I wonder if it should be a dictionary item or a brief new page? Maybe both. Macdonald-ross (talk) 12:18, 28 January 2010 (UTC)
┌─────────────┘
I've done wikt:germinate, wikt:germinates, wikt:germinated, wikt:germinating, wikt:germination and wikt:germinations - if you would like to check those, I'd be grateful! -- PhantomSteve/talk|contribs\ 19:28, 28 January 2010 (UTC)
- Thank you, review done; I'll do my simple bit tomorrow. Macdonald-ross (talk) 19:42, 28 January 2010 (UTC)
- Germination is up as a new page. Macdonald-ross (talk) 11:59, 30 January 2010 (UTC)