Wikibooks talk:Biology bookshelf

Big selective merger proposal.
I'm of the opinion that we need to merge a lot of the disparate biological knowledge around wikibooks into the book General Biology. This is a controversial merge (and I know it!) and that's exactly why I'm posting this here. If you have any objections, write them now or forever hold your peace. Let me clarify what I think must be done. This is not an immediate issue - it does not need to be done now or anything. This is pie-in-the-sky. Just a plan we should probably fully implement at some point in time.

The plan
I am going to be merging all the basic biological knowledge of books that aim to roughly teach a college's first semester course of Biology. Some synonyms for the basic course of biology offered in a college: "Biology A, Biology I, Biological Principles, Intro to Biology" etc... These are the books I will be merging much of their non-exclusive biological knowledge into General Biology:


 * 1) AP Biology
 * 2) A-level Biology

Both the AP-test and the AQA Biology level 1 test aim to test for similar biological knowledge - that which is taught in the first semester course of biology. These tests have different parts of the knowledge they focus on, and I agree that aid on the tests' focus should be maintained in their respective books, but there is no need to try to cover first semester biology in three separate books.

Why and How
Both of those topics share and rely on very much the same materials covered in the General Biology textbook. There are certain aspects of the subject that cannot and should not be covered in a General Biology book (such as what the AP test is most likely to test on), and that information should remain in those books. However, the general biological knowledge - such as how cells divide and the different organelles - should be kept, for now, in one place.

We should consolidate knowledge that is choppily spread out. Know If we do we will have one high-quality version of information in a single, referential place rather than a few disparate, okay stubs about the subject. An example of a book that does not need consolidation is Biology, Answering the Big Questions of Life. The information in that stands on its own legs as high quality, and is well fit to its specific purpose - we may see fit to copy information from that book, but there is no need to remove the writing from there, as the writing is doing fine there. However, here is an example of a lack of information that would benefit from just linking to the general biology textbook and emphasizing the most important points to learn. - Monk talk 05:14, 18 February 2007 (UTC)

Discussion
Please comment on this proposal below. Voting ("for"/"against") is welcomed.

Full bio textbook
I believe the the wiki community should invest the time to create a full-fledge Biology textbook (similar to that of the US History). In other words, it should be a simplified version of what we have now. Many parts of biology are not listed in the links and I think we could simplify the navigation if we have one book to encompass everything. If someone knows a lot about a specific topic, then go right ahead and write a wikibook about it and add a link to it at the bottom of one of the biology book's chapters. 207.191.200.118 00:10, 2 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * We have: General Biology. Steinsky 13:40, 10 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Locked
Why is this locked for Unregistered users, It seems like they might be those most likely to recommend a book be made.Dolive35 18:30, 27 June 2006 (UTC)