Talk:Organism

Piast's paper

An editor has seen fit to delete every mention of Piast from this article, claiming that what is said is not from his paper. But it is.

Piast DIRECTLY quotes Claudiu Bandea "As early as in 1983 Claudiu Bandea argued that the intracellular phase of a virus life cycle is ontologically mature in which “virus shows the major physiological properties of other organisms: metabolism, growth, and reproduction. Therefore, life is an effective presence” (Bândea, 1983)."

Further, Piast states "Maybe viruses are very different from us, but they still express mutual features with living organisms that inanimate matter does not have. They store information about themselves and have the ability to evolve."

I would be extremely grateful if this discussion could proceed rationally, starting from these simple facts, which are obviously relevant to this article on organism. Otherwise the editing behaviour can only be seen as disruptive. Chiswick Chap (talk) 16:36, 7 July 2024 (UTC)

Dear Chiswick Chap,

The quotes are in fact correct. However, the understanding of the whole paper is not. Especially when you are claiming Piast is behind the "virus as a nonliving entity" notion. On the contrary. In his papers (not only this one) he is putting forward a thought that viruses belong to living world. Read the section about transmission feature where he is comparing the viruses' life cycle to Chlamydia. He is underlining the fact that we are missing the point in the viral way of life and that we should change our point of view. He is basing his idea on the previous work of Bandea and Forttere.

Also, your table is not from his work, as it implies an opposite point of view from his. When you are quoting other authors from Piasts work, quote them, not Piast.

In the end. Move the table from the section where you are quoting Piast and Bandea as it does not fit their papers. There are many authors sharing this point of view and similar comparisons. You do you and let me present Piasts, Fortteres and Bandeas point of view which you obviously do not know enough about. Jedzwarzywa (talk) 17:18, 7 July 2024 (UTC)

Thank you, discussion is always best. Please refrain from making comments about other editors which could easily be interpreted as personal attacks, it is forbidden. On moving the table and citing other authorities for it – there are certainly many who could be cited to support its viewpoint – that will be fine, feel free to do that. Chiswick Chap (talk) 17:50, 7 July 2024 (UTC)