Template talk:Biomes

	Ecology NA‑class
This template is within the scope of the WikiProject Ecology, an effort to create, expand, organize, and improve ecology-related articles.EcologyWikipedia:WikiProject EcologyTemplate:WikiProject EcologyEcology articles NA This template does not require a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.

	Environment Template‑class
Template This template does not require a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.

Forestry Template‑class

This template is within the scope of WikiProject Forestry, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the profession and science of forestry on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ForestryWikipedia:WikiProject ForestryTemplate:WikiProject ForestryForestry articles Template This template does not require a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.

Why is unneeded. There are large parts of the world where naming grassland is completely unknown. If it's not needed for some it doesn't mean it's not needed for majority. People would look for steppe and wouldn't know where to click. Elk Salmon (talk) 06:01, 16 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@

original research. —hike395 (talk) 19:24, 16 December 2018 (UTC)[reply

]

Later ---

Temperate coniferous forests" is shown as "Coniferous forests", "Temperate broadleaf and mixed forests" is shown as "Broadleaf and mixed forests", "Temperate deciduous forest" is shown as "Deciduous forest", and "Temperate grasslands, savannas, and shrublands" is shown as "Grasslands, savannas, and shrublands". Adding the word "steppe" would (in effect) be renaming one of the biomes. —hike395 (talk) 19:31, 16 December 2018 (UTC)[reply

]

This is an encyclopedia, not a reference book. So common names should be used

WP:NPOV. Elk Salmon (talk) 08:54, 17 December 2018 (UTC)[reply

]

@

renaming process at Talk:Temperate grasslands, savannas, and shrublands

.

I'm not sure why you're bringing up

WP:NPOV. Is the argument that WWF's scheme for biomes and ecoregions reflect the POV and biases of WWF? That's true: I've been concerned about that since before 2005. —hike395 (talk) 14:23, 17 December 2018 (UTC)[reply

]

I recommend that the list be updated as per the recent list at https://www.worldwildlife.org/biomesVinay84 (talk) 20:25, 29 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

What particular changes do you want? The terrestial biomes already include all the WWF terrersial biomes at your link, although it also includes Riparian and Wetland, which I assume would fall under other WWF biomes. The aquatic biomes don't seem to follow the WWF system. I'm not even sure most of those listed as aquatic biomes are actually biomes. While they are related concepts, are pelagic zones or kelp forests biomes? Similarly I don't think Endolithic zone is a biome. Perhaps these need to be moved to an other section outside the biomes and realms sections. Jts1882 | talk  08:41, 30 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

For starters, I propose we 1. Remove Temperate deciduous forest, Riparian zone, from terrestrial Biomes. 2. Move Wetland to Aquatic Biomes. 3. Remove Mangroves from Aquatic Biomes.Vinay84 (talk) 14:19, 8 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Vinay84: I've made a sandbox version at {{Biomes/sandbox}}. The terrestrial biomes are now just the 14 WWF ones. I've added the WWF freshwater and marines biomes to the aquatic section (these need wikilinking to articles). The other items I've moved to the other section for now. I'm not sure if they should be listed as biomes, but I've left them for now as they have been in the template as such for years. Jts1882 | talk  07:31, 9 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you very much @Jts1882:, this looks much better. Can you push the update or should we go for a vote?Vinay84 (talk) 14:51, 9 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Vinay84: It doesn't look like anyone is watching this discussion or is sufficiently interested, but I think we should at least wait. There is room to improve it further. It needs better links for the aquatic biomes, which don't seem to have suitable articles or sections to link to. Also we should do something about the other biomes section as many are not really biomes. It needs trimming or renaming, possibly something like other biomes and ecoregions/ecosystems. 14:58, 9 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]