Deletion of List of important publications in biology

Comment: to List of biology journals. Current title is combative, extremely POV and in violation of several, consensus accepted, naming conventions ( for 1). What makes these publications more "important" than those listed at List of biology journals; in the neutral eyes or WP? If something significant happened in the publication past, it should be mentioned in the Article, or as a ''Note'' in a List, '''not''' the basis for a separation from the rest of similar periodicals. Exit2DOS
Stance: merge
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Article titles (WP:POVTITLE)

Comment: Redirect to List of biology journals, per comment just above. Merge content into History of biology, History of neuroscience, etc., etc., etc. There is no way for editors to determine the boundary between what is and what isn't a "breakthrough" without engaging in . It would be much more encyclopedic to discuss these published studies in the course of pages that discuss the breakthroughs as they occurred during the histories of the respective fields. Also, note Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Stand-alone lists: normally our list pages are lists of blue-linked Wikipedia articles, not lists of items in text form
Stance: merge
Cited policy: Wikipedia:No original research (WP:OR)