Talk:Central Dogma of Molecular Biology

Hello,

I moved this to 'Central Dogma of Molecular Biology' because this is what Crick called it and this is what gets the most google hits. Graft

But why the capitalization? This ain't a proper noun. Remember this is also a modern concept that has been worked on by many others besides Crick. Also, genetics as a field did not really exist when Crick coined the term - genetics grew from molecular biology. So of course he called it the central dogma of molecular biology since genetics really didn't exist yet. I suggest that this page be moved back. --mav

However, it does continue to be referred to as such (central dogma of molecular biology) amongst biologists (at least from my limited experience). I have never heard it called the central dogma of genetics (and I don't think it really is genetics, since RNA->Protein is largely outside the domain of genetics, but this is not really relevant to what we should call the article). I capitalize it because i think of it as a title given to that formulation, sort of like "Maxwell's Laws" or something. Maybe it's inappropriate. (Then again, I don't wholly understand when capitalization is appropriate, or even why it's important, given that we probably won't have both "Central dogma of molecular biology" and "Central Dogma of Molecular Biology" as articles.

As to moving it back, even if I agreed, I wouldn't do it myself (:P) - it was a pain in the ass moving it here. Methinks catching up redirects should be done automatically when a page is moved. Graft