Talk:genetically modified organism
Latest comment: 12 years ago by Ungoliant MMDCCLXIV in topic genetically modified organism
The following information has failed Wiktionary's deletion process.
It should not be re-entered without careful consideration.
Any organism which has been genetically modified. According to Wikipedia, what we call "recombinant DNA technology" is the totality of the techniques used to genetically modify something. Mglovesfun (talk) 22:15, 16 June 2012 (UTC)
- Neutral observation: this term is commonly expressed by an abbreviation, GMO. Equinox ◑ 22:16, 16 June 2012 (UTC)
- I'm sorry, but I don't understand why this is listed. If the definition is wrong, that's an RFV issue (or it could by changed without RFV). But the term has long-term wide-spread use, so Keep.--Dmol (talk) 22:39, 16 June 2012 (UTC)
- No it's right, see my comment "Any organism which has been genetically modified". Mglovesfun (talk) 22:40, 16 June 2012 (UTC)
- Yeah, I understand the listing. It's like, say, "genetic tampering" (which can be found in very many texts), where it just refers to tampering with genes. The ol' sum of parts. Brown leaf. But I'm not taking a stance with this one at the moment. Equinox ◑ 22:41, 16 June 2012 (UTC)
- That reply was for Dmol (just in case it wasn't clear). And obviously I don't oppose GMO. Mglovesfun (talk) 22:45, 16 June 2012 (UTC)
- Wikipedia also gives genetically engineered organism. I've added GEO. Mglovesfun (talk) 22:47, 16 June 2012 (UTC)
- That reply was for Dmol (just in case it wasn't clear). And obviously I don't oppose GMO. Mglovesfun (talk) 22:45, 16 June 2012 (UTC)
- Yeah, I understand the listing. It's like, say, "genetic tampering" (which can be found in very many texts), where it just refers to tampering with genes. The ol' sum of parts. Brown leaf. But I'm not taking a stance with this one at the moment. Equinox ◑ 22:41, 16 June 2012 (UTC)
- No it's right, see my comment "Any organism which has been genetically modified". Mglovesfun (talk) 22:40, 16 June 2012 (UTC)
- I'm sorry, but I don't understand why this is listed. If the definition is wrong, that's an RFV issue (or it could by changed without RFV). But the term has long-term wide-spread use, so Keep.--Dmol (talk) 22:39, 16 June 2012 (UTC)
- Comment. "Genetically modified plants", "genetically modified animals", "genetically modified microbes", "genetically modified rice", "genetically modified crops", and "genetically modified livestock" are all very well attested: each has at least a few hundred hits on b.g.c., and a few are in the tens of thousands. (Not that I really trust b.g.c. counts, to be honest. But it's better than nothing.) So, maybe redirect to [[genetically modified]]? —RuakhTALK 23:00, 16 June 2012 (UTC)
- Yeah, fine, or delete.—msh210℠ (talk) 07:34, 17 June 2012 (UTC)
- Am actually fine with the redirect for once; searching for genetically modified organism seems to not bring up genetically modified at all, which is worrying. Mglovesfun (talk) 21:59, 19 June 2012 (UTC)
- Yeah, fine, or delete.—msh210℠ (talk) 07:34, 17 June 2012 (UTC)
- Redirected. — Ungoliant (Falai) 05:52, 16 August 2012 (UTC)