Talk:Bob Wong (biologist)
Latest comment: 3 years ago by Rotideypoc41352 in topic Proposed merge of Bob Wong (ecologist) into Bob Wong (biologist)
| This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page. |
 | This redirect does not require a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
.svg){kind=logo}
 | Text and/or other creative content from this version of Bob Wong (biologist) was merged into Bob Wong (ecologist) with this edit on 01:55, 5 June 2021 (UTC). The former page's history now serves to provide attribution for that content in the latter page, and it must not be deleted as long as the latter page exists. |
Sources
editNo sources found for following content:
Positions Held
Secretary of the International Society for Behavioral Ecology Chair of the Organizing Committee for the 2022 International Society for Behavioral Ecology Congress, Melbourne.
Proposed merge of Bob Wong (ecologist) into Bob Wong (biologist)
edit- The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section. A summary of the conclusions reached follows.
- The result of this discussion was merged as an uncontroversial merge of duplicate articles. Rotideypoc41352 (talk · contribs) 02:42, 5 June 2021 (UTC)
Appears to be a second article on same person. "(biologist)" was moved into mainspace first, so should be the one which continues to exist. See Talk:Bob Wong (ecologist) for timeline. PamD 13:18, 4 June 2021 (UTC)
- PamD, I agree with the jist of Scope creep's comment on the ecologist talk that we should merge "(biologist)" into "ecologist" instead. We will probably keep more content from the eco article than bio one. For ease of attribution, we should see that content's writer directly in the main article's history without having to navigate to the redirect's history, if that makes sense. If you agree, the merge is uncontroversial; we should just go ahead and close this discussion, then boldly merge (biologist) into (ecologist). [On mobile; please forgive the shorthand, thank you.] Rotideypoc41352 (talk · contribs) 20:30, 4 June 2021 (UTC)
- I really think that the earlier-created article, "(biologist)", should be allowed to continue, with relevant material from "(ecologist)" merged into it and properly acknowledged. It's a pity that neither of the people who moved the two articles into mainspace thought to add a hatnote to Bob Wong to direct readers (and editors) to the new article: the person moving the second one would have discovered that the article was redundant. Both articles were being developed in draft at the same time, so neither creating editor could have been expected to know that the other draft existed (if "(biologist)" had made it to main space just a couple of days earlier, the creator of "(ecologist)" would (or should) have found it and the problem not arisen. PamD 22:46, 4 June 2021 (UTC)
- But as the creating editor for the admittedly much inferior "(biologist)" article is an IP, not a registered editor who might be eager to have credit for creating it, then... OK, let's do it the other way round. PamD 22:50, 4 June 2021 (UTC)
- I really think that the earlier-created article, "(biologist)", should be allowed to continue, with relevant material from "(ecologist)" merged into it and properly acknowledged. It's a pity that neither of the people who moved the two articles into mainspace thought to add a hatnote to Bob Wong to direct readers (and editors) to the new article: the person moving the second one would have discovered that the article was redundant. Both articles were being developed in draft at the same time, so neither creating editor could have been expected to know that the other draft existed (if "(biologist)" had made it to main space just a couple of days earlier, the creator of "(ecologist)" would (or should) have found it and the problem not arisen. PamD 22:46, 4 June 2021 (UTC)
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.