Talk:Coexistence theory

[Untitled]

A previous version of this page was based on an essay I wrote for a class at the University of Colorado Boulder in spring 2014. -- Gaurav (talk) 01:18, 20 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Split proposal

How would people feel about making the section on "Cultural Coexistence Theory" into its own page? We can reference it here with one of those "Did you mean...?" links at the top of the page. I guess I feel that the coexistence theory that this article is describing is a branch of ecology, and designed to understand how species coexist. Cultural coexistence theory, as far as I understand, is anthropology, and I don't see how it relates to the other themes of the article (e.g., stabilizing and equalizing mechanisms, invasion analyses, etc). Does anyone have any objections to that? Simonmstump (talk) 21:50, 19 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, this should clearly be its own page, IMO, since it is a completely separate topic. beanstash (talk) 14:30, 22 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, the Cultural Coexistence sections does not belong here. The make the distinction clear, the main page could also be called "Species coexistence theory". 76.23.40.185 (talk) 15:44, 19 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I would note that currently, the only article cited in this section is the 2016 paper that first coined the term social-ecological coexistence theory (A brief search could not find evidence for the term cultural coexistence theory or its purported acronym) for studying Cook Inlet fisheries. Google Scholar finds two more uses of the term, one of which is again in the context of Cook Inlet Fisheries in response to new regulatory development there. The other one is a 2017 paper on early Buddhism in a journal intended for early-career researchers. This contains what I would consider in-depth coverage of the original theory. So before making an independent page, one should remodel the text to actually take account of secondary sources. Felix QW (talk) 15:35, 17 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]