Talk:Naturalisation (biology)
Latest comment: 3 years ago by 176.149.114.93 in topic What to do with this article?
 | This article is written in British English, which has its own spelling conventions (colour, travelled, centre, defence, artefact, analyse) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus. |
 | This article is rated Stub-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||||||
What to do with this article? edit
Maybe make it a redirect to Introduced species? I see that a past redirect to Invasive species was reverted on the grounds that naturalized does not mean invasive (the Introduced species article does a decent job of describing this debate - there is a lot of controversy not just over whether non-natives are bad, but also what to call different kinds of non-natives and where to draw lines).
In any event, I really doubt we want yet another article on what is more or less the same topic. Kingdon 22:45, 7 February 2007 (UTC)
I disagree. This article is about an overlapping but distinct concept. 24.20.131.232 (talk) 05:43, 25 September 2008 (UTC)
- Content + references added, wikification in progress. 176.149.114.93 (talk) 18:29, 2 March 2021 (UTC)