Talk:Biological agent

Merge redundant Wikidata items "biological weapon" (Q170907) and "biological agent" (Q2742406)?
The Wikidata items mentioned in the title seem to be rendundant duplicates. Can/should they be merged? As I am still new to editing Wikipedia, I don't know how this works and want to avoid breaking anything accidentally. Thank you for your help! Ego.Eudaimonia (talk) 12:38, 7 October 2020 (UTC)

CIA-Tests "on 2200 Adventists in the 1970s"?
Maybe somebody interested can check what is claimed in the german version, as the source cited is no more precise than: "C.Piller, K. R. Yamamoto, Gene Wars, New York 1988." without citing a precise page. Herbert R. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.116.159.115 (talk) 10:08, 10 October 2020 (UTC)
 * Oops: There is another source mentioned: Hearings before the Select Committee to Study Governmental Operations with Respekt to Intelligence Activities of the United States Senate, Ninety-fourth Congress, Volume 1, Washington 1976, S. 6 - Herbert R.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.116.159.115 (talk) 10:11, 10 October 2020 (UTC)

BW in Culture
I was unaware a User can delete a section: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk%3ABiological_agent&type=revision&diff=1038970652&oldid=1033285639 Charles Juvon (talk) 23:39, 15 August 2021 (UTC)
 * For promotional content that is non-encyclopedic, it is appropriate. See WP:PROMOTIONAL: "Wikipedia is not a soapbox, a battleground, or a vehicle for propaganda, advertising and showcasing. This applies to usernames, articles, drafts, categories, files, talk page discussions, templates, and user pages. Therefore, content hosted in Wikipedia is not for: ... recruitment of any kind: commercial, political, scientific, religious, national, sports-related, or otherwise...It can be tempting to write about yourself or projects in which you have a strong personal involvement."


 * and WP:TALKOFFTOPIC: "It is common to simply delete gibberish, test edits, harmful or prohibited material (as described above), and comments or discussion clearly about the article's subject (as opposed to the treatment of the subject in the article)." (emphasis mine) Your comment was borderline, but any comment which is so extremely unlikely to ever be suitable for inclusion should not be posted here (or anywhere on the wiki). I know you were only trying to help, and I believe you generally have good intentions with all of your edits. But that particular example was not suitable for posting and that is why I deleted it.


 * Re: the other sections in that diff, I actually just archived them. They can now be found in the archive links at the top of the page. See: WP:ARCHIVE.-- Shibboleth ink (♔ ♕) 01:42, 16 August 2021 (UTC)