Talk:HOTHEAD (gene)

Untitled
See also Talk:Arabidopsis_thaliana. A link to Lolle et al. 2005 was added to the A. thaliana page shortly after the paper was published, and discussion about this citation was premature ensued. Evidence for notability is that the paper attracted broad initial interest (see NYT piece etc.) and then controversy. The debate could be seen as a case study on the dangers of pollen contamination and insufficient skepticism about 'hot' results in prestigious journals, and perhaps even on the possibility for groupthink on public review sites like F1000 (an argument for anonymity in peer review). I commented on the Talk page years later, suggested trimming the discussion. JS Hoyer (talk) 14:05, 26 October 2016 (UTC)