This article is within the scope of WikiProject Microbiology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
Microbiology 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.MicrobiologyWikipedia:WikiProject MicrobiologyTemplate:WikiProject MicrobiologyMicrobiology articles
An editor has requested that an image or photograph be
added to this article.
Untitled
Hi
I added the definition of fastidious from answers.com which defined it as "Having complicated nutritional requirements." Please do not remove it as
Blood agar contains this word which needs a definition.
Flowright138(talk)(contributions) 09:50, 21 March 2012 (UTC)reply
I am aware of the notability issue; however, I think we can expand more on it by including some examples of fastidious organisms and examples of media in which those fastidious organisms can grow on. But please allow me time to add content over time.
Flowright138(talk)(contributions) 09:50, 21 March 2012 (UTC)reply
Move?
Should the title of this article be "fastidiousness" or "fastidious microbes?" It seems unusual to have an encyclopedia article titled with an adjective. --
TeaDrinker (
talk) 01:26, 26 March 2012 (UTC)reply
Not even "fastidious (microbe)" works because its not actually a noun. As an adjective, I agree it is unusual. I can't really see how this could ever get to Featured Article status (which is the end goal for all articles). I'd say "Fastidious" better belongs in Wikidictionary or the like.
Jesse V. (
talk) 03:49, 26 March 2012 (UTC)reply
Plenty of articles could never be brought to
FA status, but that in itself doesn't make them illegitimate. That said, I agree that the definition of "fastidious" in biology belongs at
wikt:fastidious. I suggest that information about media for growing fastidious microbes belongs at
Growth medium#Enriched media, and information about fastidious microbes themselves belongs in a new section at
Microbial ecology. Better to present this information within broader articles that provide context, I think.
Adrian J. Hunter(
talk•
contribs) 06:22, 26 March 2012 (UTC)reply
@ teadrinker. You did raise a point, I just noticed that having an adjective is unusual. @jessemv. Indeed, my original intention was to define the word. Since it was a word that does not come up in everyday language, I thought that it was necessary to make its own wikipedia page for it. I suppose that is not a valid reason to start a new page so, which is why I thought throwing in more content would hopefully be enough. But, I guess not all English words has its own wikipedia page. So, I am happy to have this article remove again. But in contrast, would it be possible to link the word fastidious to the wikidictionary page, as a click able link? Or is that not allowed due to the wikipedia hyperlinking standard?
Flowright138(talk)(contributions) 11:00, 28 March 2012 (UTC) PS: better leave this talk page if we are to format the content of this article for the next person that will probably start this up again.
Flowright138(talk)(contributions) 11:10, 28 March 2012 (UTC)reply
I think there is some merit to this article as this term does seem to be fairly commonly used (see for example
PubMed and
Google). However this article should be renamed. My suggestion is "fastidious organism".
Boghog (
talk) 06:26, 30 March 2012 (UTC)reply
If there is consensus to Move this article to "Fastidious organisms" I would be happy to do that. I have never moved an article before so if noone has any objections I can take care of that. Are we all agreed to move to "Fastidious organisms"? Just want to make sure, since we can't undo the move apparently. :D
Jesse V. (
talk) 02:44, 5 April 2012 (UTC)reply
Done I was
WP:BOLD and went ahead and renamed this article. Cheers.
Boghog (
talk) 14:31, 6 April 2012 (UTC)reply
I have just modified one external link on
Fastidious organism. Please take a moment to review
my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit
this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).
If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with
this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with
this tool.