Talk:Principle of coordination

Technopedia Center

Faculty of Engineering and Computer Science
S1 Informatics S1 Information Systems S1 Information Technology S1 Computer Engineering S1 Electrical Engineering S1 Civil Engineering

faculty of Economics and Business
S1 Management S1 Accountancy

Faculty of Letters and Educational Sciences
S1 English literature S1 English language education S1 Mathematics education S1 Sports Education

Talk:Principle of coordination - Wikipedia

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

(Redirected from Talk:Principle of Coordination)

Animals Low‑importance

Principle of coordination is within the scope of WikiProject Animals, an attempt to better organize information in articles related to animals and zoology. For more information, visit the project page.AnimalsWikipedia:WikiProject AnimalsTemplate:WikiProject Animalsanimal

Low

This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

WikiProject Animals To-do:

Here are some Open Tasks :

Copyedit:
Merge: GLAM/ARKive donated texts into articles about endangered species.
Improve: Photoperiodism, Tool use by non-human animals, Omnivore, Animal suicide, Sphaerium beckmani (a species in family Sphaeriidae),
Requests:
- Mammals:
- Invertebrates: Campocraspedon
- Fishes: Zaniolepis frenata
Merge: GLAM/ARKive donated texts into articles about endangered species.
Expand: Junqueira cow, Atka mackerel
Nominate and vote: Science collaboration of the month, Article Improvement Drive, WikiProject Animals Collaboration

Tree of Life Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Tree of Life, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of taxonomy and the phylogenetic tree of life on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Tree of LifeWikipedia:WikiProject Tree of LifeTemplate:WikiProject Tree of Lifetaxonomic
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Requested move 5 November 2021

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: Moved. (non-admin closure) Simplexity22 (talk) 20:10, 12 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

– Except for these five, all "Principle of" titles on Wikipedia use lowercased principle descriptions. I don't see why these should be exceptions, as Wikipedia avoids unnecessary capitalization. I also notice that the one source cited in the Principle of Ubiquity article uses lowercase for it. The first two of these articles don't cite any sources (except one dead link). In the Priority article, this cited source uses lowercase, and I haven't yet found the term used very clearly in the other sources cited there. The Typification article cites one source, but it has some kind of access restriction. —⁠ ⁠BarrelProof (talk) 00:06, 5 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: I've alerted WikiProject Biology. SchreiberBike | ⌨ 01:52, 5 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Support - We use lowercase for the "Law of foo" articles. I see this also as falling into the "theory of foo" category, which is specifically stated in the MOS to be lowercase. Primergrey (talk) 03:34, 5 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support - Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 04:45, 5 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support none appear to be proper nouns, all are generic. Crouch, Swale (talk) 09:30, 5 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support - MOS:SCIMATH applies for most and where it doesn't directly, it does by analogy. Further, there appears to be no evidence that might otherwise cause us to consider capitalising them. Cinderella157 (talk) 00:02, 7 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Categories: