Talk:Ecophagy

	Environment portal This environment-related article is part of the WikiProject Environment to improve Wikipedia's coverage of the environment. The aim is to write neutral and well-referenced articles on environment-related topics, as well as to ensure that environment articles are properly categorized. Read Wikipedia:Contributing FAQ and leave any messages at the project talk page.EnvironmentWikipedia:WikiProject EnvironmentTemplate:WikiProject EnvironmentEnvironment articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Futures studies

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Futures studies, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Futures studies 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.Futures studiesWikipedia:WikiProject Futures studiesTemplate:WikiProject Futures studiesfutures studies articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the importance scale.

Citations are missing!!!

Biovorous ecophagy makes a nuclear winter look like a picnic in the park. Somebody needs to write an Einstein letter on this. Let's expand this page. I am starting this talk page for expansion of Wikipedia's Ecophagy page, and to encourage some brave soul to take a stand.

Doug Goncz 14:43, 13 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Einstein waited until atomic technology existed before writing his letter.

...

I read a book that talked about this, it intreaged me quite alot, thus, looked up, the gray goo sanireo and what-not to see what I could find, and it lead me rite here

Agent Mikey

REMOVAL OF MERGE TAG

The reason is the following excerpt from ecophagy article: "However, the word "ecophagy" is now applied more generally in reference to any event—nuclear war, the spread of monoculture, massive species extinctions—that might fundamentally alter the planet." Because of that quote, you can't merge the articles. You could edit this article to focus on the now more general reference, but not merge with the specific goo article. Beam 16:37, 12 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Probably original research - moved from article

However, ecophagy is highly inprobable because bacteria and viruses are the perfect example of self-replicating organisms. They have been on Earth since the beginning of life on the planet, but still haven't managed to destroy it.

On another note, the idea of "grey goo" was one of these ideas that was mentioned off-hand by someone (not even anyone professionally related to the field) and the media grabbed it and ran with it. The general consensus in the nano-science now is that a "grey goo" phenomena is almost entirely gobble-dee-gook and it not a plausible possibility, even should such nano scale engineering become a reality. You will be hard-pressed to find a reputable scientist that will support the concept. I would support the removal of any mention of "grey-goo" from any serious article about nanoscience.178.15.151.163 (talk) 11:58, 12 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 2 external links on Ecophagy. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

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.

Cheers.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 02:03, 28 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]