Talk:Largest mass extinction in 65 million years underway, scientists say

Great article - this is one of the most dramatic underreported stories. But this needs to be integrated with the wikipedia.

i suggest at a minimum: {{wikipediapars|[[w:Holocene_extinction_event#The_Ongoing_Holocene_Extinction|the ongoing Holocene extinction event]]}}

In fact hopefully i can add this now without risking an edit conflict... since the author claims to be sleeping right now... Done. Boud 23:34, 7 March 2006 (UTC)

Great article! Ben

Article title

From the title of the article (currently "Largest mass extinction in 65 million years: scientists"), it appears as if the most massive extinction of the last 65 million years is the scientists themselves. I kind of chuckled at that. ironiridis 03:37, 8 March 2006 (UTC)

change title to "Largest mass extinction in 65 million years underway: scientists"? Doldrums 06:11, 8 March 2006 (UTC)

I personally don't think title needs changing. Makes sense enough. Is precise. NPOV. etc...--elliot_k 06:33, 8 March 2006 (UTC)

I read it the same way Doldrums did. Having read the article and seeing that the extinction of scientists is not the case, I still don't understand what the title's trying to say. Is this some new and unusual use of the colon to mean ", according to" ? —67.174.118.57 12:06, 8 March 2006 (UTC)

I just don't like changing titles unless absolutely necessary. The convention of using a colon is indeed in widespread usage. One of the sources to this story utilises colons in this manner. And I really like colons: they're great - dashes too.--elliot_k 12:21, 8 March 2006 (UTC)

The confusion arises here because of regional differences. US papers would prefix the source. 24.94.246.41 23:12, 11 March 2006 (UTC)

you could just invert the title

Indeed, it seems as if the largest mass extinction in 65 million years IS THE scientists. Any reasonable person could read it this way. In most print journalism, if a group of people have come to the same conclusino about an event, their "group name" is put first.

Just invert the title. It is NOT clear that the scientists are saying the extinction is happening.

Invert it to "Scientists: Largest mass extinction in 65 million years." This would be on par with AP style, as the title the way it is written is NOT in wide usage. (preceding unsigned comment made by 65.23.83.214)

Feel free to change it. But is is absolutely necessary? --elliot_k 17:50, 8 March 2006 (UTC)

It does seem like the scientists are the ones going extinct. Better headline would be "Largest mass extinction in 65 million years, scientists say" (preceding unsigned comment made by 206.21.164.251)

Title edited

My apologies, I never thought to check the discussion page before editing the title but I think its an improvement (preceding unsigned comment made by Paldorslate)

Sorry, but I changed the title again. "Say" could have meant "for example" in this case... Townsdown 10:01, 10 March 2006 (UTC)

TITLE CHANGES

Please stop changing titles - unless absolutely necessary. --elliot_k 02:20, 14 March 2006 (UTC)

Ill-placed temperature graph

Can the temperature graph be moved? That section doesn't say anything about temperatures--the "hotspots" mentioned are not literal. The next section does mention rising temperatures as one cause.

The graph is to illustrate the notion of Global Warming, which is mentioned in the article, and is at the crux of the story. Please sign your comment.--elliot_k 02:24, 14 March 2006 (UTC)

>>>In 1993, Harvard biologist E.O. Wilson estimated that the planet is losing 30,000 species per year - around three species per hour. --- any reference?