http://www.oxfordreference.com/view/10.1093/oi/authority.20110803095450905 shows it this styled this way, with a hyphen-minus rather than an ndash. To my eye, a
| This article is rated Stub-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
http://www.oxfordreference.com/view/10.1093/oi/authority.20110803095450905 shows it this styled this way, with a hyphen-minus rather than an ndash. To my eye, an ndash would render this as (basic rest)–(activity cycle) which is not the right semantics. Certainly, regardless of symbol, rest-activity is intended to be read as a balanced phrase. — MaxEnt 04:45, 28 February 2017 (UTC)
BRAC seems to be an idea that sank without a ripple. Very difficult to find contemporary articles on this subject. It's dishonest to present Kleitman as discovering 90-minute cycles in sleep, then to suggest that "he went on" to conceive of BRAC, as though it's a fruitful concept full of promise. Rather, he read the Italian research on 50-minute cycles in infants, that made him more flexible when he interpreted the data about sleep cycles, end of story. Vagabond nanoda (talk) 02:53, 2 February 2020 (UTC)
Informasi ini disarikan dari Wikipedia dan disajikan kembali untuk tujuan edukasi. Konten tersedia di bawah lisensi CC BY-SA 3.0. Kami tidak bertanggung jawab atas ketidakakuratan data yang bersumber dari kontribusi publik tersebut.