Jump to content

Talk:Lynn Margulis/Archive 2

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 1Archive 2

Request edit on 23 July 2015

In the introduction to Lynn Margullis the following: "Lynn Margulis (born Lynn Petra Alexander;[1][2] March 5, 1938 – November 22, 2011)[3] was an evolutionary biologist who was the primary modern proponent for the significance of symbiosis in biological evolution: historian Jan Sapp noted that, "Lynn Margulis’s name is as synonymous with symbiosis as Charles Darwin’s is with evolution."[4]" should be replaced with: "Lynn Margulis (born Lynn Petra Alexander;[1][2] March 5, 1938 – November 22, 2011)[3] was an evolutionist who was the primary modern proponent for the significance of symbiosis in biological evolution: historian Jan Sapp noted that, "Lynn Margulis’s name is as synonymous with symbiosis as Charles Darwin’s is with evolution."[4] Rationale: Margulis never considered herself an evolutionary biologist because that field, evolutionary biology, was neo-Darwinist, She referred to herself as an "evolutionist" and her degrees were in zoology and genetics. Now that the Modern Synthesis and the Dawkins idea of "the selfish gene" have been demonstrated to be incomplete or wrong in all assumptions and rules,[1] it seems inappropriate to call her something she disagreed with for almost her entire 50-year career.

References

  1. ^ Noble, Denis. "Evolution and physiology: a new synthesis". Voices from Oxford. Voices from Oxford. Retrieved 24 July 2015.

James D. MacAllister (talk) 19:03, 24 July 2015 (UTC)

Another idea: The very first citation of the article is the NY Times obit, which called her an evolutionary theorist, and that could be used, but how about not searching for the ONE word that depicts Margulis, but rather listing all of her areas of expertise? This is in fact done with a great many Wiki entries, including many other important biologists, and given that she was so broad based and had such wide and diverse expertise, I should think that this would be highly appropriate.
It's true that I called her an evolutionary biologist, but before it was American biologist, and given the importance of evolutionary process to what she did for biology, I just changed it to that reflexively - I actually don't think it's bad to take the word back from the neo-Darwinists, but there's also nothing special about the name either. We can forego it.....
So, what about -
Lynn Margulis was an American evolutionary theorist, biologist, microbiologist, taxonomist, bacteriologist and protistologist with degrees in zoology and genetics, and is above all known as.....Terradactyl (talk) 23:31, 24 July 2015 (UTC)
(I hope neither of you mind, but I refactored a little above.) Probably pick EITHER "microbiologist" OR "bacteriologist and protistologist" (redundant to include both), and drop "biologist" as it's redundant to everything else. Adrian J. Hunter(talk•contribs) 00:22, 25 July 2015 (UTC)
Just a note to say that Lynn Margulis was not a microbiologist, that was not her field. Microbiologists deal with macromolecules and extrapolate from things like DNA sequencing. Although the name might lead you to believe they look through microscopes, they don't (although I am sure there are a few who do). They avoid "whole organism" biology as antiquated (of course this is nuts). So let's not put in that Lynn Margulis, who loved nothing better than an uninterrupted weekend or holiday looking through the light microscope at live organisms, a microbiologist. That is as bad as evolutionary biologist! Both fields were as far from what Lynn did as "biology" gets and she provocatively said both had "taken the life out of biology". I think her work as an educator is also exemplary and needs to be featured in that description along with the other disciplines she had mastered.
Otherwise I think the introduction--thanks everyone--is a vast improvement over what was there maybe a month ago. I also appreciate that Adrian Hunter has made the changes to the HIV/AIDS theory section. Lynn Margulis certainly said the things she said in the Discover article, but she liked to be provocative (give folks an intellectual dope slap when she thought it was needed--she was above all a teacher). In context, nothing that she said was inaccurate but any questioning of a sacred cow like the HIV hypothesis is labeled as "AIDS denialism". I do appreciate Terradactyl's suggestion that some things such as this be moved to a "controversies" section. These are after all, a few sentences from a 50-year career. There is also another "controversial" subject that Lynn Margulis and her lab did extensive work on and that is chromidia. These are a form of propagule that got tossed out of science because they did not occur in animals, plants and fungi, but Margulis and her lab would maintain that this is one of many ways that protoctists deal with dramatic changes (such as desiccation) in their environments. I could write something up about this with references and make an edit request. This is a subject that may have few if any secondary sources, but it is postulated and not stated as a fact, so I would hope that her papers would be permissible as references to her work in this area. It may also have been the subject of some of her graduate students' and PhD students' theses and dissertations.James D. MacAllister (talk) 13:50, 25 July 2015 (UTC)


Thanks all. Since there were no negative comments, and several positive ones, on the "controversies" section concept, I just restored, again moving the Five Kingdoms back into contributions. Since the 9/11 material got removed by Viriditas, there are now only 2 controversies - perhaps what James suggests could be added.....

Another idea: could one potentially take the spirochete symbiont aspect of SET theory and treat it here, as a continuing 'controversy', rather than adding better material about it within the endosymbiotic theory section?

I don't have really strong feelings about the opening list of fields, so if anyone else wants to do some triage on that, I'm fine with whatever you all come up with.....but I like, and prefer, the idea of not trying to have just one word to define her.....and I don't think that, just because she didn't like "evolutionary biologists" that including that word among her activities is a bad thing, although I did remove it......I agree with Adrian, that real redundancy should be avoided, although some overlap is inevitable, because of the interrelated nature of the vaarious fields of expertise.....Terradactyl (talk) 18:31, 25 July 2015 (UTC)

I removed "microbiologist" from the list of things Lynn Margulis was because she wasn't a microbiologist. I would include a reference but it is hard to reference the negative. I would suggest moving "educator" to the front of the list.71.234.176.148 (talk) 18:42, 25 July 2015 (UTC)

I would like to request that the last line of the opening paragraph of the Lynn Margulis page, "Margulis was also the co-developer of Gaia theory with the British chemist James Lovelock, proposing that the Earth functions as a single self-regulating system, and was the principal defender of the five kingdom classification of Robert Whittaker." I request that we add that she "was the principal defender and promulgater of the five kingdom classification of Robert Whittaker." My rationale is that Margulis edited and published four editions of "Five Kingdoms: An Illustrated Guide to the Phyla of Life on Earth" (the fourth edition was retitled "Kingdoms and Domains: An Illustrated Guide to the Phyla of Life on Earth". James D. MacAllister (talk) 20:10, 11 August 2015 (UTC)

Sounds reasonable to me. I've added "and promulgater" per your request. Thanks, Adrian J. Hunter(talk•contribs) 11:00, 14 August 2015 (UTC)

I just realised the original edit request from 23 July was still open. I've closed it, as I think the original concern has been addressed. But just to confirm: @James D. MacAllister:, are you ok with "evolutionary theorist"? I actually prefer this term over "evolutionist", as just about any time I've heard the latter, it's been used as a disparaging term by a creationist (and I see I'm not the first to notice this).

I've removed "biologist" and "microscopist" from the first sentence, as both seem redundant to "bacteriologist" and "protistologist". I haven't moved "educator" to the front as Margulis' obituaries in Washington Post, New York Times and The Guardian all emphasise her work as a scientist much more than her work as an educator.

It sounds like a section on chromidia would be a valuable addition, especially as these are barely mentioned in Wikipedia. So long as such a section were short enough not to give undue weight, and did not overstate the acceptance of chromidia by other scientists, I think this would be a legitimate use of primary sources. Adrian J. Hunter(talk•contribs) 11:35, 14 August 2015 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Lynn Margulis. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 20:03, 9 January 2018 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Lynn Margulis. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 07:36, 22 January 2018 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Lynn_Margulis/Archive_2&oldid=838591784"