Talk:Tissue

Notes

On WP:PNA there is a message. Can anyone discuss moving this article to tissue (disambiguation) and biological tissue to tissue?? 66.32.240.88 22:43, 8 Oct 2004 (UTC)

about

cells unite together to form a tissues.Tissues are found both in plants and animals.Some of the plant tissues are sclerenchyma,parenchyma,epidermal tissues,collenchyma.Animal tissues are ......... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 117.199.135.200 (talk) 14:36, 1 August 2009 (UTC) !!!![reply]

Move of Tissue (biology) here

The vastly most common use and the most common search term for tissue will be for biological tissue. While tissue paper is common enough it shouldn't be the main page. Adding a disambiguation adds clicks and decreases our readership. Also it is poor practice for SEO. -- CFCF 🍌 (email) 07:05, 8 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose. The most common use on "tissue", in American English at least, refers to facial tissue, not biological tissue. Currently, neither meaning of tissue holds the main page, and that is appropriate. --EncycloPetey (talk) 19:56, 8 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Do you truly believe that readers will be coming here looking for that type of tissue? I don't think we should dictate titles based upon American slang. -- CFCF 🍌 (email) 08:23, 9 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I'm very surprised too that biological tissue does not hold the main page. --5.170.67.108 (talk) 22:01, 11 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

support--Ozzie10aaaa (talk) 09:43, 12 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
After looking into this, I have changed my mind.
- Tissue (biology) is linked on about 1,165 articles. 423 of those are due to five navboxes.
- All of the tissue paper related ones, including facial tissue, add up to links in 428 articles. 240 of those are in navboxes.
- Although it's likely that some articles contain links in both the article body and in the navboxes, as a quick back of the envelope calculation, that's almost four times as many links for the biological sense than for all the paper uses together. Therefore I can support the move. WhatamIdoing (talk) 22:47, 12 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Comment and STRONG Procedural oppose this is an improper move request. You should be using the WP:Requested moves process, to inform people of this, since it affects more than just WPMED. Indeed most topics are not WPMED topics. And WPMERGE is the completely wrong process, so this is procedurally incorrect as well. -- 67.70.32.190 (talk) 05:21, 18 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

You seem to be slightly misunderstood – before any move is made it will go to requested moves, but we've got to have the discussion somewhere. The merge tag was unrelated or incorrect, but it doesn't retract from this discussion. -- CFCF 🍌 (email) 14:39, 18 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Your cut and paste moves did not inspire confidence in having the correct procedure being followed. Please make sure you post a proper (FULL NOMINATION and not a SPEEDY one) rename request through WP:Requested moves, when the time comes. The involvement of only WPMED results in a WP:CONLIMITED result that does not apply across fields. -- 67.70.32.190 (talk) 04:21, 19 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Support. I've started a move request at Talk:Tissue (biology)#Requested_move_3_February_2016. -- Gaurav (talk) 01:02, 3 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Move discussion in progress

There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:Tissue (biology) which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. —RMCD bot 01:15, 3 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]