Good articleLife has been listed as one of the Natural sciences good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.
Did You Know Article milestones
DateProcessResult
October 17, 2007Peer reviewNot reviewed
June 13, 2012Peer reviewReviewed
December 30, 2015Good article nomineeNot listed
April 4, 2016Good article nomineeNot listed
May 6, 2016Peer reviewReviewed
August 7, 2022Peer reviewReviewed
September 27, 2023Good article nomineeListed
Did You Know A fact from this article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the "Did you know?" column on November 5, 2023.
The text of the entry was: Did you know ... that life exists in every part of the biosphere, from the deepest parts of the ocean (bacterium pictured) to altitudes of up to 40 miles (64 km) in the atmosphere?
Current status: Good article

Book "How Life Works" (2023) worth considering?

edit

A review by scientist Denis Noble of a new book entitled "How Life Works: A User’s Guide to the New Biology" (2023) by Philip Ball (editor of the journal Nature) may be worth considering?[1] - iac - Stay Safe and Healthy !! - Drbogdan (talk) 04:53, 6 February 2024 (UTC)Reply

References

  1. ^ Noble, Denis (5 February 2024). "Book Review of "How Life Works: A User's Guide to the New Biology" by Philip Ball, Pan Macmillan (2023) - It's time to admit that genes are not the blueprint for life - The view of biology often presented to the public is oversimplified and out of date. Scientists must set the record straight, argues a new book". Nature. 626: 254–255. doi:10.1038/d41586-024-00327-x. Archived from the original on 5 February 2024. Retrieved 5 February 2024.

Drbogdan (talk) 04:53, 6 February 2024 (UTC)Reply

Hi , I've read it. There's nothing new. Graham Beards (talk) 14:19, 12 April 2024 (UTC)Reply

"Non-cellular life" in infobox

edit

As far as I'm aware, the biological community generally does not regard such entities as lifeforms. I am in favor of removing this. Anonymous 15:23, 19 May 2024 (UTC)Reply

As far as I am aware, the biological community has yet to agree on a definition of life. So I disagree, it should be kept. Graham Beards (talk) 16:05, 19 May 2024 (UTC)Reply
@Graham Beards, as far as I'm aware, and you can be too if you read the respective articles, Wikipedia does not refer to viruses, virusoids, and viroids as being alive. The idea that viruses might be considered alive is brought up on their respective article, but the articles on virusoids and viroids do not even entertain such an idea. Given that the latter two are essentially just bits of RNA, should we also add rRNA, mRNA, etc. to the infobox? Regardless, my main point is that we should have some consistency within Wikipedia itself. Anonymous 19:25, 24 May 2024 (UTC)Reply
Hi, first of all please have a look at Wikipedia is not a reliable source and other stuff exists. I wrote Virus and much of Viroid, so I don't need to read the articles. Regarding consistency within Wikipedia, there is no such policy or guideline. Each article stands or falls on its own merit. So I am sticking to my argument that "the biological community has yet to agree on a definition of life. So I disagree, it should be kept." Graham Beards (talk) 19:47, 24 May 2024 (UTC)Reply
Can you provide me a reliable source describing either viroids or virusoids as alive? Furthermore, if any infectious agent is being regarded as a lifeform, then prions might as well be added to the list. Anonymous 23:31, 24 May 2024 (UTC)Reply
Can you provide a reliable source for what "alive" means? I doubt it because as I said above " the biological community has yet to agree on a definition of life". The existence of "non-cellular life" makes a definition elusive. You might find this paper interesting: Moelling K, Broecker F (March 2021). "Viroids and the Origin of Life". International Journal of Molecular Sciences. 22 (7). doi:10.3390/ijms22073476. PMC 8036462. PMID 33800543.{{cite journal}}: CS1 maint: unflagged free DOI (link) Graham Beards (talk) 09:38, 25 May 2024 (UTC)Reply

Meaning & definition of life

edit

I don't get the point of contention surrounding its meaning or purpose where this statement: "Life is a quality that distinguishes matter that has biological processes, such as signaling and self-sustaining processes, from matter that does not." Very well captures the universal essence of life? Wikicmon (talk) 07:29, 9 September 2024 (UTC)Reply

It's not our prerogative to ignore the controversy and complexity reflected in what sources say on the matter just because we personally find a certain definition sufficient. Remsense ‥  07:46, 9 September 2024 (UTC)Reply