Template talk:Life, non-cellular life, and comparable structures
 | This template does not require a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||
| ||||||||
Prion
editI would like to delete prion from this template, as these protein (polypeptides) particles are not living nor considered living by any fringe research group. BatteryIncluded (talk) 13:34, 15 May 2014 (UTC)
Yes, it was never my intention to suggest they are living. This is where it gets pedantic: by my understanding only life can be described as living. The group 'life' is included in this template, but only includes bacteria, archae, and eukaryota. Therefore it is implied that every other item is merely a comparable organic structure, but not living. JamesDouch (talk) 13:48, 15 May 2014 (UTC)
Done Ypna (talk)
Nano-structures
editShouldn't the nanobes and nanobacteria be added to this template (... and comparable organic structers) in some way? Pinoczet (talk) 00:46, 9 September 2015 (UTC)
Question mark after Nanobe
editHey, Why is there a question mark after Nanobe? Is it because the classification is debated? Thank you so much! Sincerely, JuxtaposedJacob (talk) 00:39, 1 February 2024 (UTC)
Same question. I think we should take it out or clarify what it supposed to mean.
Update: Hi, @Ypna:! It seems to be your 2020 diff. Do we need this "?" sign? Thank you. Evilfreethinker (talk) 16:34, 12 February 2024 (UTC)
- Hi. I added the "?" because, if I understand correctly, the nanobe hypothesis is a very controversial and tentative interpretation of fossil evidence, and in reality these structures may not actually be an example life, non-cellular life, or even a comparable structure. Ypna (talk) 05:16, 14 February 2024 (UTC)