Jump to content

Talk:Peppered moth evolution

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

An editor has removed the quotation from the evolutionary biologist Jerry Coyne on Majerus's experiments, on the grounds of the essay WP:USESPS. However, essays are never more than advisory, and where they conflict with policy, they are wrong. The actual policy is WP:RSSELF, which the essay has over-enthusiastically tried to explicate. The policy states: "Self-published expert sources may be considered reliable when produced by an established expert on the subject matter, whose work in the relevant field has previously been published by reliable, independent publications."

Coyne is a major player in evolutionary biology. He has published many widely-cited peer-reviewed papers, so he meets the "established expert" and "work in the relevant field" criteria. The reason for the dislike of blogs is that anyone can write one; but when a scientist is notable and relevant, per WP:RSSELF, then the concern doesn't arise. We should therefore restore the brief cited quotation from Coyne on the subject. Chiswick Chap (talk) 07:40, 30 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Text restored. WP:USESPS even says, "Sometimes, a self-published source is even the best possible source or among the best sources." The statement is particularly relevant to the whole story. Chhandama (talk) 08:39, 31 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Alternative hypothesis

[edit]

The selective factor proposed på P. A. Riley is not alternative to natural selection, but alternative only to the predation factor. Should be moved up. 185.91.152.17 (talk) 13:41, 7 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

True but there's nowhere "up" to move it to. Chiswick Chap (talk) 13:55, 7 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]