Disputatio:Bionta

Contribuenda

I agree, and as preparation I have found and footnoted a couple of sources for "Biota" as taxonomic head: hence we can confidently treat "Bionta" as a non-preferred synonym. The Spanish article es:Biota (taxonomía) already does this (maybe others too). Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 13:46, 18 Martii 2018 (UTC)

Lots of abandoned concepts have their own article. (Why, philosophia is rife with them!) The current text seems to be a fact in the history of science, and so it should be preserved somewhere, even if only as a footnote in Biota. For reference: the whole text of the English article is currently "Bionta is a defunct taxon created by Lee Barker Walton in 1930, to denominate all the living beings. It was divided up into three subkingdoms; Protistodeae, Metaphytodeae (multicellular plants), and Zoodeae (multicellular animals)." IacobusAmor (disputatio) 14:44, 18 Martii 2018 (UTC)

I agree about preserving abandoned knowledge, but in this case I do think that a note in Biota would do the job. Lesgles (disputatio) 15:49, 18 Martii 2018 (UTC)

If we follow our generous practice with synonymous taxa (of which there are oodles, though this one is right at the top of the tree) we would preserve the redirect (of course) and also retain the two categories Categoria:Taxa Walton and Categoria:Taxa 1930 on the redirect page. Thus "Bionta" would continue to appear in italics in the appropriate categories.

So far as I can see, en:wiki doesn't have a page "Biota", unlike many other wikis. Therefore en:wiki doesn't yet have anywhere for "Bionta" to redirect to! I expect they'll get there in the end. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 16:11, 18 Martii 2018 (UTC)