Talk:Biological rhythm

We need this page

Like I said in edit summary, a natural phenomenon and the branch of science which study such phenomenon are very different things. For example, organism and biology are different subjects. Same with Biological rhythm versus Chronobiology. If you think this page should not exist, please use AfD. My very best wishes (talk) 13:49, 30 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Please pay attention to the template at the bottom of this page. Someone made it correctly, i.e. it includes chronobiology as one of sub-subjects related to biological rhythms (this page). My very best wishes (talk)

Yes, one is the phenomenon, and one is the study of the phenomenon. In other words, as expressed in the lead of Chronobiology, they are the same thing. Splitting is unhelpful to readers, especially when neither article could be considered comprehensive or overly long. What part of "moving content from page Chronobiology" when first creating the article is not a split? Lithopsian (talk) 19:12, 7 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

No, the subject of study and the corresponding branch of biology are always different. Consider insects and entomology, etc. As I said, someone correctly made the template at the bottom of this page to include chronobiology as one of sub-subjects related to biological rhythms. My very best wishes (talk) 19:25, 7 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Then the split should sail through without a single objection, don't you think? Lithopsian (talk) 19:39, 7 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

What split? I did not propose any split. My very best wishes (talk) 19:52, 7 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]