Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Quaploid


 * The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review).  No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was   delete. WP:SNOW  MBisanz  talk 05:05, 17 March 2009 (UTC)

Quaploid

 * ( [ delete] ) – (View AfD) (View log)

I think the author made up this term. I could not find any mention of it in any scientific journals. Odie5533 (talk) 07:58, 14 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete per WP:MADEUP. Bongo  matic  10:00, 14 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete Definitely a joke, done surprisingly well. Johnuniq (talk) 10:25, 14 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Indeed&mdash;viz the vandalism to Interphase and Meiosis. Bongo  matic  12:11, 14 March 2009 (UTC)

Quadraploid is an incorrect biological term. I think you may be thinking of a tetraploid however this just refers to cells with four sets of homologous chromosomes. We are refering to germline cells not somatic cells which your definition is more appropriate for. I am one of the authors of the page Quaploid (the co-author and I are studying Medical Genetics at University) and we believe that such a term would make the process of meiosis much easier to understand because currently we refer to the original and replicated cell as being diploid. This is illogical as for example, we don't refer to two men as a man. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Fannysyouraunt2 (talk • contribs) 16:39, 14 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Snowball Delete per above. Delete per nom . -Axmann8  ( Talk )  12:35, 14 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete as WP:OR neologism, as per author's own statement above. Fut.Perf. ☼ 17:24, 14 March 2009 (UTC)

"the correct terms are either quadraploid (which is not often used), or tetraploid", Only the use of quadraploid is monopolised in by mathmeticians so inclusion in public works would cause confusion. People are entitled to use new terms so long as they define them, this is how we get such a broad vocabulary. You are right it is definately made up but that doesn't make it incorrect. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Altruisticgene (talk • contribs) 10:41, 15 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete, the correct terms are either quadraploid (which is not often used), or tetraploid. Tim Vickers (talk) 16:16, 14 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete per WP:OR and WP:NEO: "Articles on protologisms are usually deleted as these articles are often created in an attempt to use Wikipedia to increase usage of the term." JohnCD (talk) 18:16, 14 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete. No hits on Google other than on Wikipedia?  This is definitely made up.  Matt (talk) 06:36, 15 March 2009 (UTC)
 * No, not incorrect, but the point is that Wikipedia is not the place for first publication of your new idea, or anything new. See No original research and Wikipedia is not for things made up one day. The last is written mainly for people who have made up a silly word or a new game or a spoof religion, but its advice is serious and applies just as much to people like you who have made up a new word with serious intent. Only if it becomes established and widely used would an article be considered; and even then, Wikipedia is not a dictionary. JohnCD (talk) 11:52, 15 March 2009 (UTC)


 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.