This level-4 vital article is ratedC-class on Wikipedia'scontent assessment scale. It is of interest to the followingWikiProjects:

Molecular Biology:MCB This article is within the scope ofWikiProject Molecular Biology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage ofMolecular Biology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can jointhe discussion and see a list of open tasks.Molecular BiologyWikipedia:WikiProject Molecular BiologyTemplate:WikiProject Molecular BiologyMolecular Biology ??? This article has not yet received a rating on theimportance scale. This article is supported bythe Molecular and Cell Biology task force (assessed asTop-importance). Biophysics (inactive) This article is within the scope ofWikiProject Biophysics, a project which is currently considered to beinactive.BiophysicsWikipedia:WikiProject BiophysicsTemplate:WikiProject BiophysicsBiophysics

Are biomolecules notorganic compounds?Bensaccount21:18, 3 May 2004 (UTC)[reply]

I created a compromise version betweenBensaccount andStewartadcock. Bensaccount, it's good to have snappy sentences and concise definition and I appreciate your attention to brevity and succintness, but it also doesn't hurt toalso include a short few intro sentencesafter these concise one-sentence definitions to help orient less technically inclined readers. Remember wikipedia is not a dictionary, and it encyclopedia entries should be able to be read in relative isolation (ultimately a paper version of wikipedia is planned), so don't assume that the reader is always in front a browser. --Lexor|Talk21:53, 3 May 2004 (UTC)[reply]

Bensaccount, your initial edit removed (cf. moved) much valid content and instead basically said, "a biomolecule is an organic molecule". It depends upon the definitions you choose to follow but, from the definitions usually used by a chemist, a biomolecule is not necessarily an organic molecule. I think it's best to leave statements that can be disputed out of the introductory passage when a perfectly good intro already exists. (I'mnot saying that the intro isn't open to improvement.)Stewart Adcock03:15, 5 May 2004 (UTC)[reply]

At least a few molecules produced by living things are clearly inorganic, not organic, in the chemistry sense - such as shell calcium carbonate. In the other direction, a huge number of chemically synthesized organic molecules are not biomolecules. (Ooops! maybe we need to watch out for an ambiguity about molecules produced by organic chemists?) But in general, it doesn't seem helpful replace a definition easily understood by anyone with a technical term such as "organic compound". Using the technical term at a second level could be very good, along with an explanation of it in terms of the atom types and bonding.

In general, the current version of the article is pretty good, altho there are a few misleading details such as the descriptions of helix and sheet in the protein section - I'll try to work on those. -Dcrjsr (talk) 17:00, 24 June 2012 (UTC) Done. -Dcrjsr (talk)18:11, 24 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

"Besides the polymeric biomolecules, numerous big organic molecules are absorbed by living systems. Many biomolecules may be not useful or important in the future"

Don't living things absorb other molecules, small or big? And don't living organisms also absorb other non-organic things?

What does "Many biomolecules may be not useful or important in the future" mean? If living things are made of solely on biomolecules, then wouldn't biomolecules be important for sustaining life for future generations? Maybe I just read it wrong, but it seems contradictory to me

--71.108.1.20019:56, 1 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Apparently the above two statements have been removed, which is a good step - I feel they were poorly worded, incorrect by most interpretations, and not especially useful to a reader. -Dcrjsr (talk)18:11, 24 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The comment(s) below were originally left atTalk:Biomolecule/Comments, and are posted here for posterity. Followingseveral discussions in past years, these subpages are now deprecated. The comments may be irrelevant or outdated; if so, please feel free to remove this section.

Last edited at 15:11, 18 February 2007 (UTC).Substituted at 09:42, 29 April 2016 (UTC)

The cited author says they'll use the term to refer to "anymacromolecule that, like a protein or a nucleic acid, is essential to some typically biological process". Of course that's an example of just one author's use of it, and fits the article's definition, but I don't think it really works as a reference for it if we then immediately change the definition's scope to include smaller molecules.Musiconeologist (talk)17:11, 8 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• C-Class level-4 vital articles
• Wikipedia level-4 vital articles in Biology and health sciences
• C-Class vital articles in Biology and health sciences
• C-Class Molecular Biology articles
• Unknown-importance Molecular Biology articles
• C-Class MCB articles
• Top-importance MCB articles
• WikiProject Molecular and Cellular Biology articles
• All WikiProject Molecular Biology pages
• Top-importance and Start-Class MCB articles

• All Wikipedia vital articles