Draft talk:Original research/Biology

Title and content
"So what is your resolution for pages such as Biology, Glaciers, and other pages brought up in the beginning of this discussion? Certainly would be nice to add some useful context in these pages rather than just a bunch of random definitions there... though I do oppose just straight out deleting them (as I respect Marshall's hard work here). But alas, I feel like action needs to be taken on these pages. A lot of work I was planning on adding to pages like Volcano and Glaciers... I can't do. I have no clue where I should put them. ---Atcovi (Talk - Contribs) 18:56, 14 January 2018 (UTC)
 * Actually there's an easy fix! If you'd like to use the resource title Volcano which is a redirect and you'd like to be the resource creator, I can delete the redirect if there are no objections and you are free to use it. --Marshallsumter (discuss • contribs) 19:09, 14 January 2018 (UTC)
 * Ditto for Glaciers and Glacier is unused. --Marshallsumter (discuss • contribs) 19:15, 14 January 2018 (UTC)
 * O bviously the name of a whole science should be a TOC like entry point to the topic, and not "someones" page. I wrote unless the name is really bad. If Biology is currently kind of owned, then I agree that it should be renamed. But I think it should be renamed because Marshallsumter apparently chose too broad a name - and not just because it is in the mainspace. People who choose reasonably specific page names should be spared the hassle of broken links. Watchduck (quack) 20:35, 14 January 2018 (UTC)" Copied from Requests for Deletion --Marshallsumter (discuss • contribs) 15:44, 12 April 2018 (UTC)