Talk:Botany
{{Talk header}}
{{British English}}
{{Article history
|action1=GAN
|action1date=14:13, 2 June 2012
|action1link=Talk:Botany/GA1
|action1result=listed
|action1oldid=495613823
|action2=PR
|action2date=18:29, 7 September 2013
|action2link=Wikipedia:Peer review/Botany/archive1
|action2result=reviewed
|action2oldid= 571839276
|action3=FAC
|action3date=10:07, 16 September 2013
|action3link=Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Botany/archive1
|action3result=not promoted
|action3oldid=573129459
|currentstatus=GA
|topic=natsci
}}
{{WikiProject banner shell|class=GA|vital=yes|1=
{{WikiProject Plants|importance=Top}}
{{WikiProject Biology|importance=high}}
{{WikiProject Horticulture and Gardening|importance=Top}}
{{WikiProject Environment|importance=high}}
}}
{{Copied|from=Botany |from_oldid=593446400 |to=Life sciences |diff=https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Life_sciences&diff=next&oldid=593979253 }}
{{User:MiszaBot/config
|archiveheader = {{talk archive navigation|noredlinks=y}}
|maxarchivesize = 150K
|counter = 2
|minthreadsleft = 3
|minthreadstoarchive = 3
|algo = old(90d)
|archive = Talk:Botany/Archive %(counter)d
}}
{{Note short footnote style 2 in use|sources=Sources}}
{{Archive box|auto=yes|search=yes|bot=Lowercase sigmabot III|age=90}}
{{Broken anchors|links=
}}
Plant biology vs botany
I believe the name of the article should be "Plant biology" rather than Botany. As a biologist I come across the first term more. I can defend my argument by pubmed search; thus search for "plant biology" yields 29000 results; whereas botany gives only 7000 results; Not that I prefer plant biology personally, botany is nice name enough but that's the trend in science now; Better proof would be probably searching for scientific journals mentioning the corresponding names. Araz Zeyniyev (talk) 09:08, 23 November 2023 (UTC)
Wiki Education assignment: Principles of Ecology
Discussion on improving the lead paragraph (for general information)
WP editors User:Smartse and User:Davidbena recently discussed the lead paragraph and whether or not it should be expanded by citing an antiquated source taken from Encyclopædia Britannica (1823). A link to that discussion can be seen here. This is solely for general information.Davidbena (talk) 14:23, 9 January 2025 (UTC)