Talk:Consumer (food chain)

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 5 January 2022 and 4 April 2022. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): JJJ7171 (article contribs).

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 22 January 2019 and 24 May 2019. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Stina0814, Hugoac10, Brayan1110.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 18:22, 16 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hetertroph is a consumer

Is this article even needed? I think a redirect to heterotroph would be sufficient?Thompsma (talk) 18:05, 15 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I think this article is specifically aimed at consumers in terms of food chains, rather than the biology of heterotroph. Aurous One (talk) 03:39, 9 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Primary Consumers Cite error: A <ref> tag is missing the closing </ref> (see the help page).</ref>

I agree with User:Thompsma. The article heterotroph covers the subject far better. --Polinizador (talk) 19:32, 27 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

This article could be a bridge between "heterotroph" and ecology. However, we are far from that right now. Unfortunately, I do not have the time right now for this massive undertaking and nobody seems to be in the mood to do so. Temnothorax (talk) 22:50, 26 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Consumer (food chain). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Poor-quality article, needs major editing

This is a really low-quality article. It's incomplete, unclearly organized, and has lots of typos. I strongly feel that it should either be thoroughly edited or just deleted, because as-is, it is not useful and is just likely to confuse people. Amber Kerr (talk) 15:45, 23 April 2019 (UTC)amberckerr[reply]

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.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 14:16, 12 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Sea Angels Details

The third sentence of the first paragraph mentions sea angels as if they are a common animal that everybody knows. I had to look up what a sea angel was to understand the sentence. I suggest either changing the example to a different animal or providing more background on what a sea angel is. --BiologyBiologyBiology (talk) 00:36, 11 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]