 | This redirect does not require a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||||||
Wictionary edit
it was suggested that this page be moved to the wiktionary instead of the wikipedia. apiology is an important branch of zoology to which thousands of scientists have dedicated their lives. It is in the same category as other branches of zoology (the study of a specific group of animals) such as myrmecology, herpetology, or mammalogy. If it is gong to be removed from wikipedia, all other zoology branch pages should be moved as well. AJseagull1 00:08, 28 March 2007 (UTC)
Apicology edit
In response to 24.174.237.205's edit. Apicology was not a typo. AJseagull1 04:55, 28 March 2007 (UTC)
But . . . how can "apicology" be a honey bee ecology? Is it, perhaps, the study of honey bee ecology? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.161.135.99 (talk) 18:21, 5 December 2008 (UTC)
Joey Kalmin edit
I removed Joey Kalmin from the list of notable Apiologists as he works on hornets, a type of wasp not a type of bee. - AJseagull1 00:10, 12 September 2007 (UTC)
- I removed Joey Kalmin again, because I can't find any legitimate references to him. Does he have any artices in a high impact peer reviewed journal? What institution is he affiliated with? Has he made any major contributions to science or industry? The other individuals listed all have been published multiple times in high impact peer reviewed journals or they made major contributions that have lead to dramatic changes to bee keeping practices world wide. AJseagull1 16:52, 13 November 2007 (UTC)
Notable Apiologists edit
I undid the removal of all apiologists who don't have their own wikipedia page. As great as wikipedia is, I don't think that the existence of a wikipedia entry is the ultimate measure of notability. AJseagull1 (talk) 20:28, 1 July 2008 (UTC)
- [http://www.amazon.com/Biology-Honey-Bee-Mark-Winston/dp/0674074092 M. Winston Book on Amazon]
- [http://www.amazon.com/s/ref=nb_ss_b?url=search-alias%3Dstripbooks&field-keywords=seeley+bee&x=0&y=0 T. Seeley Book on Amazon]
- [http://www.amazon.com/Queen-Rearing-Breeding-Harry-Laidlaw/dp/187807508X/ref=sr_1_2?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1214944624&sr=1-2 R. Page Book on Amazon]
- AJseagull1 (talk) 20:39, 1 July 2008 (UTC)
- See reply on talk page. The thing to do, if they are notable, is to create articles for them. That's really the way to go. Setwisohi (talk) 22:12, 1 July 2008 (UTC)
- That is why it is important to have a line or 2 stating why the notable people are notable (especially if they don't have their own article). That way the wikipedia community can decide on a case by case basis. There isn't a consensus on wikipedia to blanket remove these people. Lots of lists include people who don't have their own page. For example: List of Harvard University people, List of people from Wyoming, List of biologists, List of chemists, etc.AJseagull1 (talk) 22:33, 1 July 2008 (UTC)
- I will put some references on the page. to establish notability Cheers,AJseagull1 (talk) 22:44, 1 July 2008 (UTC)
- That is why it is important to have a line or 2 stating why the notable people are notable (especially if they don't have their own article). That way the wikipedia community can decide on a case by case basis. There isn't a consensus on wikipedia to blanket remove these people. Lots of lists include people who don't have their own page. For example: List of Harvard University people, List of people from Wyoming, List of biologists, List of chemists, etc.AJseagull1 (talk) 22:33, 1 July 2008 (UTC)
- See reply on talk page. The thing to do, if they are notable, is to create articles for them. That's really the way to go. Setwisohi (talk) 22:12, 1 July 2008 (UTC)
- Actually, you are incorrect. Wikipedia policy is more or less as I described it: red links should not be created unless the intention is to write an article for that link. In preference, the article should be written first. See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Red_link for guidelines. In the meantime, I have removed the link aspect of the disputed names. If you wish to keep them, please create the relevant articles. Setwisohi (talk) 08:25, 2 July 2008 (UTC)
Suzanne Batra edit
I removed Suzanne Batra from the list. If she is reinserted, please include a link or some info about what she did to be considered notable. AJseagull1 (talk) 22:15, 3 June 2009 (UTC)
Notable Apiologists edit
Please list a reference for notable apiologists added to the list if there is no Wikipedia page to link to. Savannah Foley has no citation. AJseagull1 (talk) 06:43, 17 March 2010 (UTC)
Pliny? edit
Should Pliny the Elder be added to the list of notable Apiologists? He wrote quite a lot about them. He wasn't always right, but at least he wasn't claiming that honey bees were born from bull carcasses like Aristotle did. If anyone is interested in looking, it's in his Natural History, book 11, chapter 4. Or does he just count as a generic naturalist? 86.17.165.131 (talk) 12:50, 16 May 2011 (UTC)
Francis Huber edit
How can you make a list of notable Apiologists and leave out Huber? He even has his own wikipedia page... but mostly he settled many of the confusing issues such as how a queen mates, which queen leaves with a swarm, where wax comes from, how combs are constructed, what pollen is used for etc. not to mention he built one of the first movable frame hives. Michael Bush (talk) 10:36, 12 September 2011 (UTC)