Talk:Dynamic energy budget theory

Can someone please assess the class and importance, and potentially suggest other categories? I am feeling not competent enough for assessing objectively! Ninamarn (talk) 08:49, 6 April 2018 (UTC)

Resolved

unnamed

I edited this article to replace the original text, which was a copyvio, but I don't know any more about the subject than I could discover in a few minutes of internet research, so, someone who knows more than me... make it better!! - squibix 18:38, 9 December 2005 (UTC)

Thank you! I have just thoroughly edited the article so I think this can be considered as resolved.Ninamarn (talk) 08:38, 6 April 2018 (UTC)

Please

Please make this redirect directly to dynamic energy budget. Thanks. 68.148.165.213 14:17, 10 July 2006 (UTC)

Hi, I checked the version prior to 10July 2006, and it had 'Dynamic Energy Budget', probably because the DEB theory is referred to with capitalized words (e.g., in the summary) of the book, including the current (2010) edition. The title of this article has been changed to 'Dynamic energy budget' shortly after this request was made, to comply with wiki capitalization rules ,if I understood correctly?.

I will hence mark this as resolved Ninamarn (talk) 09:53, 19 March 2018 (UTC)

DEB vs MTE

I suggest adding a link in the "see also" for the metabolic theory of ecology and include this reference (which compares both) van der Meer, J. 2006. Metabolic theories in ecology. Trends in Ecology and Evolution 21:136-140. Botfly 22:31, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

thanks Botfly! I have included that and some other ones, so am moving this to resolved Ninamarn (talk) 08:38, 6 April 2018 (UTC)

Stray text?

The majority of the article on Body_size_scaling seems to belong here. I'd like to move it over so I can redirect that page to allometry, but this is pretty far outside of my area of expertise. Can anyone here do it in a sensible way? Mokele (talk) 02:46, 31 July 2009 (UTC)

This has been done, and the part about body size scaling edited since. Marking it as resolved. Ninamarn (talk) 09:13, 20 March 2018 (UTC)

copy/paste?

69.140.152.55 (talk) 19:52, 7 December 2008 (UTC)

I plan to remove this tag/talk point in a week (10-Apr-2018) unless someone provides additional evidence of there still being copyvio. I have checked the version in question (20-Jun-2006), and compared it to the book on the DEB theory, DEB Info page, and several general publications on general principles which were out at that time (eg 1, 2). (1) I cannot determine which part was copy right violation, so please point out which parts are (still) suspicious. (2) There have been many revisions since then, [EDIT: also, I have just published a major revision; Ninamarn (talk) 08:38, 6 April 2018 (UTC)] so I think the parts that might have been a copy-right violation have been addressed. Ninamarn (talk) 07:33, 3 April 2018 (UTC)

Changing the title of the article to 'Dynamic energy budget theory'

This article refers to the Dynamic energy budget (DEB) theory. Therefore, I'd like to include the 'theory' in the title, i.e., change the title to 'Dynamic energy budget (DEB) theory'. I think having 'DEB' in the title would help with the searches etc, as it is often referred to by its acronym in the community.

Ninamarn (talk) 09:56, 19 March 2018 (UTC)

Not needed, the acronym is listed with a link to this article on the Deb disambig page. Vsmith (talk) 16:53, 20 March 2018 (UTC)

Hey Vsmith, thank you for your reply! Yes, I saw that. Wouldn't it be more direct if the acronym was already present in the title though? Is there any guideline or rule against it? I was reading Wikipedia:Article titles, so maybe having both would make it less concise, but more recognizable? I would like to keep the things somehow uniform and interlinked as I am also maintaining another DEB portal. My plan is to clean up the article and resolve the flagged issues bit by bit, but first the title came to mind, because of the way I usually search for this article (and that is 'DEB theory'). What's your opinion on adding the word 'theory'? Maybe because it will actually MOVE the page, it is not worth inserting either the acronym or 'theory'? Also, should I insert the template that I am requesting an edit, or is it unnecessary as you are already helping me?

Ninamarn (talk) 03:51, 21 March 2018 (UTC)

EDIT: I decided to go ahead and move the site to Dynamic energy budget theory, as I haven't seen a good reason not to, and would be more accurate Ninamarn (talk) 08:38, 6 April 2018 (UTC)