Wikipedia talk:WikiProject History of Science/Archive 3

This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Warburg's Tincture

Hi. I recently created and originated an article on Wikipedia about Warburg's Tincture. I'm writing here to enquire if the article should added to the Medicine WikiProject? I feel Warburg's Tincture is important in the history of medicine.--Roland Sparkes (talk) 18:14, 5 January 2010 (UTC)

I meant WikiProject History of Science. Can the article the Warburg's Tincture be added please? And also the Carl Warburg article? --Roland Sparkes (talk) 00:26, 6 January 2010 (UTC)

WP 1.0 bot announcement

This message is being sent to each WikiProject that participates in the WP 1.0 assessment system. On Saturday, January 23, 2010, the WP 1.0 bot will be upgraded. Your project does not need to take any action, but the appearance of your project's summary table will change. The upgrade will make many new, optional features available to all WikiProjects. Additional information is available at the WP 1.0 project homepage. — Carl (CBM · talk) 03:25, 22 January 2010 (UTC)

AfD nomination of Ancient Arabic units of measurement

An article that you have been involved in editing, Ancient Arabic units of measurement, has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ancient Arabic units of measurement. Thank you.

Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. Jeepday (talk) 15:08, 31 January 2010 (UTC)

Iron group

I noticed that the Sun article contained some discussion of the iron group and contained a redlink to that article, so I created it. Since this group is considered obsolete by chemists, I feel that its purview belongs to the History of Science project and thought I ought to bring it the attention of the History-of-Science wikipedians. --arkuat (talk) 04:55, 26 February 2010 (UTC)

Unreferenced living people articles bot

User:DASHBot/Wikiprojects provides a list, updated daily, of unreferenced living people articles (BLPs) related to your project. There has been a lot of discussion recently about deleting these unreferenced articles, so it is important that these articles are referenced.

The unreferenced articles related to your project can be found at >>>Wikipedia:WikiProject History of Science/Archive 3/Unreferenced BLPs<<<

If you do not want this wikiproject to participate, please add your project name to this list.

Thank you.

Update: Wikipedia:WikiProject History of Science/Archive 3/Unreferenced BLPs has been created. This list, which is updated by User:DASHBot/Wikiprojects daily, will allow your wikiproject to quickly identify unreferenced living person articles.

There maybe no or few articles on this new Unreferenced BLPs page. To increase the overall number of articles in your project with another bot, you can sign up for User:Xenobot_Mk_V#Instructions.

If you have any questions or concerns, visit User talk:DASHBot/Wikiprojects. Okip 00:51, 28 March 2010 (UTC)

Soliciting Help from History of Science Project to Encourage New Editor

I am soliciting the History of Science Project to lend a hand to a new editor User talk:Kdksobiech and his first article: Correspondence of the 18th Century Naturalists. I removed a PROD that was I believe inappropriately placed on the article within seconds after its creation. The article needs clean up and may need to be broken up into sections related to each naturalist, but it doesn't warrant deletion. Even though it isn't in great WP style, it appears well sourced and has potential for a very interesting list. Any support and encouragement you can give: User:Kdksobiech would be appreaciated.--Mike Cline (talk) 14:36, 27 March 2010 (UTC)

Missing science-related topics

I've updated my list of Missing science-related topics - Skysmith (talk) 12:07, 8 April 2010 (UTC)

Carl Linnaeus assistance

Hello,

I am currently working on the Carl Linnaeus article to bring it to FA status (although GA will be the first goal). Many improvements have been made already but there is a lot to do still. Basically everything except the Biography section needs an overhaul.

Linnaeus is an important part of this wikiproject and I am wondering if there are anybody here who would like to assist me in bringing it to FA status with me (or just do some editing)? If you are, you're more than welcome to contact me on my talk page or Carl Linnaeus talk page.

Thanks, Esuzu (talk • contribs) 12:29, 15 May 2010 (UTC)

Science in the Middle Ages

Hello. You are invited to take part in the discussion on Science in the Middle Ages. The question is should we keep or remove the section on the Islamic world. Regards Gun Powder Ma (talk) 08:23, 21 August 2010 (UTC)

Johannes Hevelius

History of science articles have been selected for the Wikipedia 0.8 release

Version 0.8 is a collection of Wikipedia articles selected by the Wikipedia 1.0 team for offline release on USB key, DVD and mobile phone. Articles were selected based on their assessed importance and quality, then article versions (revisionIDs) were chosen for trustworthiness (freedom from vandalism) using an adaptation of the WikiTrust algorithm.

We would like to ask you to review the History of science articles and revisionIDs we have chosen. Selected articles are marked with a diamond symbol (♦) to the right of each article, and this symbol links to the selected version of each article. If you believe we have included or excluded articles inappropriately, please contact us at Wikipedia talk:Version 0.8 with the details. You may wish to look at your WikiProject's articles with cleanup tags and try to improve any that need work; if you do, please give us the new revisionID at Wikipedia talk:Version 0.8. We would like to complete this consultation period by midnight UTC on Sunday, November 14th.

We have greatly streamlined the process since the Version 0.7 release, so we aim to have the collection ready for distribution by the end of November, 2010. As a result, we are planning to distribute the collection much more widely, while continuing to work with groups such as One Laptop per Child and Wikipedia for Schools to extend the reach of Wikipedia worldwide. Please help us, with your WikiProject's feedback!

If you have already provided feedback, we deeply appreciate it. For the Wikipedia 1.0 editorial team, SelectionBot 16:33, 6 November 2010 (UTC)

WikiProject cleanup listing

I have created together with Smallman12q a toolserver tool that shows a weekly-updated list of cleanup categories for WikiProjects, that can be used as a replacement for WolterBot and this WikiProject is among those that are already included (because it is a member of Category:WolterBot cleanup listing subscriptions). See the tool's wiki page, this project's listing in one big table or by categories and the index of WikiProjects. Svick (talk) 20:08, 7 November 2010 (UTC)

Invitation to participate!

Hello! As you may be aware, the Wikimedia Foundation is gearing up for our annual fundraiser. We want to hit our goal, and hit it as soon as possible, so that we can focus on Wikipedia's tenth anniversary (January 15) and on our new project, the Contribution Team.

I'm posting across WikiProjects to engage you, the community, in working to build Wikipedia not only through financial donations, but also through collaboration in building content. You can find more information in Philippe Beaudette's memo to the communities here.

Please visit the Contribution Team page and the Fundraising page to find out how you can help us support and spread free knowledge. ⇒DanRosenthal ^{Wikipedia Contribution Team} 18:19, 15 November 2010 (UTC)

Early motorcycles synchronization

Please see discussion at Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Motorcycling#Early_motorcycles_synchronization.--Dbratland (talk) 02:50, 6 February 2011 (UTC)

G. J. Toomer

I just created a new article titled G. J. Toomer. Quite a large number of articles link to it, but it's very stubby. Do what you can to improve it. Michael Hardy (talk) 00:10, 4 March 2011 (UTC)

Ptolemy's table of chords

I've created an article titled Ptolemy's table of chords. It is imperfect. Work on it. Michael Hardy (talk) 23:37, 11 March 2011 (UTC)

At Talk:Ptolemy's table of chords, I've created a "to do" list of work that should get done on this article. I'll probably get to most or all of it eventually unless others get there first. Michael Hardy (talk) 00:09, 12 March 2011 (UTC)

.....and here's the to-do list:

Work that needs to be done on this article:

Further inline citations, including:

It was the earliest trigonometric table extensive enough for many practical purposes, including those of astronomy
~~(an earlier table of chords by Hipparchus gave chords only for arcs that were multiples of 7½°).~~
Several centuries passed before more extensive trigonometric tables were created.
Page numbers in Glowatzki and Göttsche?
The parts about the three distinct methods of computing chords.

More on the geometric theorems: Their precise statements, how they are proved, how they are used in deriving trigonometric identities, how those identities are used in computing chords.
History of editions of the book including those in Arabic.
When did more extensive tables supersede this one? Which century?
How did the table influence later work?

And probably other things.........

Michael Hardy (talk) 15:57, 16 March 2011 (UTC)

Please review seriousness v. proposed deletion as parody of new article Names of small numbers at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Names of small numbers

History of Science WikiProject members, please, this is being discussed at:

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Names of small numbers http://wiki.alquds.edu/?query=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Names_of_small_numbers#Names_of_small_numbers

Please also consider what additions from binary and other numbering systems and from historically and epistemologically significant concepts and works should be made to this topic as a kept article, especially subtopics which may not be known by Wikipedian editors in other fields.

Thank you. Pandelver (talk) 00:27, 12 March 2011 (UTC)

Generality of algebra

Help at generality of algebra would be appreciated. Tkuvho (talk) 20:05, 30 April 2011 (UTC)

Renaming discussion

Talk:List of Indian inventions and discoveries#Gordian Knot ballot box. Gun Powder Ma (talk) 13:43, 14 May 2011 (UTC)

RFC on identifiers

There is an RFC on the addition of identifier links to citations by bots. Please comment. Headbomb {talk / contribs / physics / books} 15:58, 15 August 2011 (UTC)

Lists of publications considered for deletion

Several lists of scientific publications are being considered for deletion (see the infobox). Some, like List of important publications in biology, already have been deleted. These are primarily historical lists. RockMagnetist (talk) 04:40, 3 October 2011 (UTC)

Carl Linnaeus – almost GA

The article on Carl Linnaeus is very close to being recognised as a Good Article. Unfortunately, the person who nominated it appears to be absent. The only outstanding issue is that the short section on "Linnean taxonomy" needs to be referenced. This is basically a summary of Linnean taxonomy, but that, too, is unreferenced. If anyone here can help with referencing that section – or even re-writing it – it would be much appreciated, and would be a huge step towards getting this very important article raised to GA level. --Stemonitis (talk) 08:23, 3 October 2011 (UTC)

New section in Ptolemy's table of chords

I have just written this new section of Ptolemy's table of chords, which I could not write until we recently acquired the ability to include some archaic Greek letters in TeX.

Doubtless further work on that section could get done, and for the rest of the article, there is a "to do" list at talk:Ptolemy's table of chords. Michael Hardy (talk) 01:40, 17 October 2011 (UTC)

physicsworld.com online lecture

On the Shoulders of Eastern Giants: the Forgotten Contributions of Medieval Physicists

presented by Jim Al-Khalili

Date: Thursday 20 October 2011 Time: 4.00 p.m. BST

Free online registration http://www.myecos.co.uk/DC/ctr.aspx?6C6164=31333236363035&736272=$$E48E9XmQ16LgEEE&747970=7478&66=30

We learn at school that Newton is the father of modern optics, Copernicus heralded the birth of astronomy and Snell deduced the law of refraction. But what debt do these men owe to the physicists and astronomers of the medieval Islamic Empire? What about Ibn al-Haytham, the greatest physicist in the 2000-year span between Archimedes and Newton, whose Book of Optics was just as influential as Newton's seven centuries later? Or Ibn Sahl, who came up with the correct law of refraction many centuries before Snell? What of the astronomers al-Tusi and Ibn al-Shatir, without whom Copernicus would not have been able to formulate his heliocentric model of the solar system? In this lecture, Jim Al-Khalili recounts the stories of these characters and more from his new book Pathfinders: the Golden Age of Arabic Science.

Register today http://www.myecos.co.uk/DC/ctr.aspx?6C6164=31333236363035&736272=$$E48E9XmQ16LgEEE&747970=7478&66=30

>> Speaker: Jim Al-Khalili Jim Al-Khalili is a physicist, author and broadcaster. He is professor of physics and also professor of public engagement in science at the University of Surrey, UK. As well as his work on radio and television, he has written a number of popular-science books, the most recent of which is Pathfinders: the Golden Age of Arabic Science. His awards include the Royal Society Faraday Prize (2008), the IOP Kelvin Medal (2011), an OBE in 2008 and a Bafta nomination.

>> Moderator: Dr Margaret Harris Reviews and careers editor, Physics World

Forward this e-mail to friends and colleagues. http://www.myecos.co.uk/DC/fwd.aspx?646C76=313332393832&736272=$$E48E9XmQ16LgEEE&66=30

Or why not share on Facebook or Twitter? Facebook: http://www.myecos.co.uk/SocialMedia/FBShare.aspx?646C76=cdpg8t4vTYQ=&736272=$$E48E9XmQ16LgEEE&737263=1&747970=31 Twitter: http://www.myecos.co.uk/SocialMedia/retweet.aspx?646C76=cdpg8t4vTYQ=&736272=$$E48E9XmQ16LgEEE&737263=2&747970=31

===========================================

- On the Shoulders of Eastern Giants:

the Forgotten Contributions of Medieval Physicists**

Thursday 20 October 2011 4.00 p.m. BST

Free online registration http://www.myecos.co.uk/DC/ctr.aspx?6C6164=31333236363035&736272=$$E48E9XmQ16LgEEE&747970=7478&66=30

===========================================

Count Iblis (talk) 00:12, 20 October 2011 (UTC)

List of important publications in chemistry at AfD

List of important publications in chemistry has been nominated for deletion. Discussion is at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of important publications in chemistry. --Lambiam 22:18, 24 October 2011 (UTC)

The result was keep. RockMagnetist (talk) 14:18, 1 November 2011 (UTC)

History of scholarship

Hi! I'm a new page patroller and ran across this new page. It's in fairly bad shape right now and could use some TLC from experienced editors who also know something of the field. From what I'm seeing, it looks like the information currently contained in the a article could fit into other articles more appropriately. I can see how this could possibly warrant its own article but this is admittedly far from my area of expertise. I could use some more eyes on the article if any of you have time. If you have any advice for me, I'd appreciate it if you could leave it on my talk page or leave me a TB if you want to continue talking here as I'm not going to put this page on my watchlist. OlYeller21^Talktome 14:15, 1 November 2011 (UTC)

List of important publications in law and List of important publications in sociology

At the time

were nominated, I believe this wikiproject was not notified. They currently are at

as User:RHaworth deleted them when I created it.Curb Chain (talk) 23:47, 4 November 2011 (UTC)

A Proposal

Below are some ideas on restructuring and revitalizing WikiProject History. It may be easier to keep discussion in one place, perhaps here.

General Points

Restructure the front page so that it more closely resembles that of WikiProject Military History. This design is easy to navigate, and getting to specific areas of the WikiProject is made quicker and less difficult.

Forge closer ties with some of its "daughter" projects. WikiProject History should serve as a focal point for history-related article improvement drives and discussions, and should be a community of editors supportive of smaller, fairly inactive region-specific history projects.

Expand the A-Class review process. This should be a major function of WikiProject History (conducting A-Class reviews for smaller, "daughter" projects).
- Work on expanding the number of History Good and Featured articles.

Host task forces devoted to improving recently-created articles. Some editors should work with WikiProject Deletion Sorting to save as many quality history-related AfDs as reasonably possible.

WikiProject History should be less of a "front-lines" WikiProject, like the Military History one, but more of a coordinating effort. An enhanced A-Class review process and forging relations with "daughter" projects would help to achieve this goal.

Membership and Leadership

All current WikiProject History members would be members of the new, revitalized project. WikiProject Military History members, as well as members of all region-specific history projects, would be automatically inducted into the project, although these users could opt out at any time.

All members of the WikiProject should have an equal say in WikiProject affairs.
- However, a group of five coordinators should be elected by all editors that are part of the abovementioned categories to make the WikiProject "flow" smoothly. These coordinators would serve for twelve months each, and would be elected in February of each year.
- Each coordinator would have a specific task, or "department".
  - Chief Coordinator. This coordinator would serve as a guide to other coordinators and members of the project.
  - Assessment and Review Coordinator. This coordinator would sort reviews, with the help of two delegates that s/he could appoint.
  - Membership Coordinator. This coordinator would deal with membership issues, and would direct and judge "contests" on the project.
  - Resources Coordinator. This coordinator would assist members in need.
  - Content Coordinator. This coordinator would work on improving articles in need, and would direct efforts and drives related to this.

Role on the Encyclopedia

WikiProject History should be a visible, important part of the encyclopedia, as it should work to coordinate other projects and direct various task forces and drives on the website. Newcomers interested in history should be assisted and guided by the Resources Coordinator and other helpful editors.

WikiProject History should work together with other projects to achieve some of the goals of the encyclopedia as a whole.

Thank you for reading this, and for commenting, if you are interested. DCItalk 23:17, 10 December 2011 (UTC)

Template:Alchemy

{{Alchemy}} has been nominated for deletion. 76.65.128.132 (talk) 04:25, 28 December 2011 (UTC)

Portal:History

Is up for FPOC. This is one of the highest (if not the highest) visibility portal on Wikipedia, I recommend commenting on it! Cheers, ResMar 23:17, 10 January 2012 (UTC)

Major Depressive Disorder (Vincent van Gogh: "At Eternity's Gate")

I refer the group to this thread on the Talk page at Major Depressive Disorder concerning the use of Vincent van Gogh's painting "At Eternity's Gate" in that article and to this comment of mine pointing out it has no place in the article and should be removed.

The essence of the complaint is that is fully documented that van Gogh's painting is not at all, nor was ever meant to be, a portrayal of depressive disorder but is rather merely a study of an old man. For that reason alone it should be removed for reasons of encyclopaedic accuracy.

As it stands it necessarily makes a judgement about the nature of depressive disorder, that it necessarily implies despair, even that it necessarily implies suicidal ideation (because of its title and van Gogh's own well known suicide). It is very much to be regretted indeed in my opinion that a Wikipedia administrator, Casliber, a practicising psychiatrist it seems but a poor historian of art, appears to be the prime mover behind perpetuating these poor judgements.

It also mythologises Vincent van Gogh himself who took the greatest care to separate his difficulties in life from his work; the nature of whose illness is not settled but which is not certainly typical of a depressive disorder; who is not documented as suffering from suicidal depressive moods in the last months of his life when this painting was completed and whose suicide itself has in the past year been plausibly questioned by a respected source as rather a manslaughter.

I ask that the image be removed. If it is felt necessary, and I cannot imagine why it should be, that the article be illustrated by a fine art image, then I suggest the original image, Durer's Melancholia, be reinserted. Skirtopodes (talk) 22:33, 13 January 2012 (UTC)

Request for Comment

I am involved in a content discussion on Talk:Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory#Mutual Misunderstings? with a gentleman identifying himself as the senior science writer for that facility, regarding the nature of relationship of the Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory to the Eugenics Record Office. I invite any disinterested by knowledgeable editors to review the discussion and weigh in. WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!! 20:31, 12 April 2012 (UTC)

Help with edit request

Would someone please take a look at the edit request here? Rivertorch (talk) 08:46, 27 July 2012 (UTC)

FAR

I have nominated Barbara McClintock for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Delist" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Dana boomer (talk) 16:39, 16 October 2012 (UTC)

RfC Input needed

Input would be appreciated at an RfC regarding the Nobel prize. --Noleander (talk) 18:54, 5 February 2013 (UTC)

Request for Comment

Would someone with expertise in complex Fourier series comment on the points I make in the Deferent and Epicycle article talk page - Is the Mathematical Formalism subsection correct?. Thanks. Dnessett (talk) 17:05, 17 April 2013 (UTC)

File:Sidereus Nuncius Medicean Stars.jpg

File:Sidereus Nuncius Medicean Stars.jpg has been nominated for deletion -- 65.94.79.6 (talk) 05:03, 12 June 2013 (UTC)

Edit-a-thon Invitation

Please join the Chemical Heritage Foundation Edit-a-Thon, June 20, 2013.
Build content relating to women in science, chemistry and the history of science.
Use the hashtag #GlamCHF and write your favorite scientist or chemist into Wikipedian history!

I would like to invite everyone here to participate. We are very excited about this opportunity to share resources from the Chemical Heritage Foundation on Wikimedia Commons and Wikipedia. Mary Mark Ockerbloom (talk) 20:28, 13 June 2013 (UTC)

One of your project's articles has been featured

Hello,
Please note that Louis Pasteur, which is within this project's scope, has been selected as one of Today's articles for improvement. The article was scheduled to appear on Wikipedia's Main Page in the "Today's articles for improvement" section for one week, beginning today. Everyone is encouraged to collaborate to improve the article. Thanks, and happy editing!
_{Delivered by Theo's Little Bot at 07:17, 5 July 2013 (UTC) on behalf of the TAFI team}

One of your project's articles has been featured

Hello,
Please note that History of geography, which is within this project's scope, has been selected as one of Today's articles for improvement. The article was scheduled to appear on Wikipedia's Main Page in the "Today's articles for improvement" section for one week, beginning today. Everyone is encouraged to collaborate to improve the article. Thanks, and happy editing!
_{Delivered by Theo's Little Bot at 21:26, 10 September 2013 (UTC) on behalf of the TAFI team}

ThatCampPhilly Edit-a-thon Invitation

Please join the Wikipedia Edit-a-thon at THATCamp Philly, September 27, 2013, held at the Chemical Heritage Foundation. Bring your own content to work on, or get an early start on Ada Lovelace Day with our resources about women in science, chemistry and the history of science. Mary Mark Ockerbloom (talk) 20:24, 24 September 2013 (UTC)

List of Romanian words of possible Dacian origin

There is a debate over a deletion proposal. All comments are welcome. Fakirbakir (talk) 18:05, 18 November 2013 (UTC)

Portal:Technology for featured candidacy

Portal:Technology

I've nominated Portal:Technology for featured candidacy. Comments would be appreciated, at Wikipedia:Featured portal candidates/Portal:Technology. — Cirt (talk) 01:58, 20 November 2013 (UTC)

Portal technology for featured candidacy

Portal:Technology

I've nominated Portal:Technology for featured candidacy. Comments would be appreciated, at Wikipedia:Featured portal candidates/Portal:Technology. — Cirt (talk) 17:36, 23 November 2013 (UTC)

Teylers Challenge: history of science

Allow me to draw your attention to the Wiki Project Teylers: a collaboration between Wikipedia and Teylers Museum (Haarlem, the Netherlands) to improve the content of articles related to Teylers Museum and its collections: Wikipedia:GLAM/Teylers/Multilingual_Challenge. Established in 1778, Teylers Museum was originally founded as a centre for contemporary art and science. Martinus van Marum, the museum's first director, corresponded with Herschel, Volta, Goethe and other leading scientist of the Enlightenment period. Van Marum was the first to introduce Lavoisier's oxygen theory in the Netherlands. He also commissioned the largest electrostatic generator in the world for Teylers Museum (still on view in the museum). The entire collection of Teylers Physical Cabinet is available online: museum website You can find more information on Teylers Museum, its history and its scientific activities in the past on a special website:Teylers Universe 1778-1826. For the Teylers Challenge we are still looking for people who'd be interested in writing / expanding articles on the history of science! The museum can supply pictures and sources.Gjjanse (talk) 12:14, 28 February 2012 (UTC)

History of medicine

Hello all. We at Wikiproject medicine are working on a project to improve and translate 80 or so key medical articles into as many other languages as possible. This is being done with the help of an NGO called Translators Without Borders. The project is discussed in detail here with the list of articles being worked on here Book:Health care. Help improving the "history of medicine" sections before translation would be appreciated. --Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 07:18, 12 March 2012 (UTC)

Help needed with adding correct categories

Stumbled on Tycho Brahe's (alleged) Calendarium Naturale Magicum Perpetuum and ended up pulling together a stub on the calendar and its "author" Johann Baptist Grossschedel. Outside my normal interests, so stuck at what cats to add. In ictu oculi (talk) 02:12, 14 April 2012 (UTC)

Soviet science articles

I've left some notes Talk:Suppressed research in the Soviet Union#One-sided take on Soviet science and Talk:Science and technology in the Soviet Union on the need for better coverage of the history of Soviet science. If anybody else wants to help with expansion, I'm certainly up for it. Peter G Werner (talk) 01:54, 3 July 2012 (UTC)

Wikimedian in Residence

I'm organizing a Wikipedia:GLAM residence at Brown University's Ladd Observatory in Providence, Rhode Island. The project involves adding images and article improvement for history of science topics relating to astronomy and timekeeping. A draft of the project description is at Outreach:Wikipedian in Residence/Ladd Observatory. Any feedback, suggestions or help spreading the word would be greatly appreciated. --mikeu ^talk 14:33, 18 October 2012 (UTC)

Germ theory of disease

Germ theory of disease

The article is incredibly small. It needs expansion. --Harizotoh9 (talk) 17:44, 19 November 2012 (UTC)

I'll be expanding on the article. Anyone else is free to join in or look at it. --Harizotoh9 (talk) 12:57, 4 December 2012 (UTC)

Wikipedian in Residence: Natural History Museum, London

Hi all,

Just to let you know that the Natural History Museum in London is advertising for a Wikipedian in Residence, working jointly there and at the Science Museum next door; it's a paid post for four months, and applications are open until 10th February. I've worked with Ed Baker at the NHM to define the scope of the program, and it looks really promising - there's some real opportunities for interesting projects here. Details are available on the National Museums site, and there's some details about other upcoming UK residency programs here.

Please pass this on to anyone who might be interested, and feel free to get in touch with me if you've any questions. Thanks, Andrew Gray (talk) 11:33, 25 January 2013 (UTC)

Wikipedian in Residence: Tyne and Wear Archives and Museums

Hi all,

Just to let you know that the Tyne and Wear Archives and Museums are advertising for a Wikipedian in Residence (announcement). It's a funded post, part-time through spring and early summer, based in Newcastle (so may well suit a student). Applications are open until 4th March. They're particularly interested in the prospect of someone wanting to work with the shipbuilding & industrial history collections, and digitising some of the material they have in their archives.

Details are available on their website, and there's some details about other upcoming UK residency programs here.

Please pass this on to anyone who might be interested, and feel free to get in touch with me if you've any questions! Andrew Gray (talk) 15:18, 13 February 2013 (UTC)

Mahoney biography

I created a page for Michael Sean Mahoney, historian of science and mathematics. The page could use further input. Tkuvho (talk) 14:15, 20 February 2013 (UTC)

Parable of the Sunfish at peer review

I'd like to invite editors interested in the history of biology to comment at the peer review for Parable of the Sunfish: Ezra Pound ponders literary and scientific epistemology by way of 19th C. pre-Darwinist biology. Many thanks, Garamond Lethet c 18:09, 12 April 2013 (UTC)

OK, I'll give it a look. Chiswick Chap (talk) 18:13, 12 April 2013 (UTC)

50 images from the Science Museum collection

Hi

I'm the Wikimedian in Residence for the Natural History Museum and Science Museum in London. The Science Museum have agreed to release 50 of it's images (at a medium resolution) under a Wikimedia compatible license. The 2 websites that the images would be available from are:

http://collectionsonline.nmsi.ac.uk/
http://www.scienceandsociety.co.uk/ (has to say copyright Science Museum)

I'm hoping this is the start of something larger but could just be a one off so am trying to come up with a most wanted list.

I've started a list of images to release on my talk page, please feel free to add to it, I'd like to get over 50 so if there are any problems we still have a good list.

--Mrjohncummings (talk) 10:38, 18 June 2013 (UTC)

Catholic / Eastern Orthodox Division Before 1054?

I think it's a little misleading to separate the "East" and the "West" churches before the Great East-West Schism in A.D. 1054. It suggests that before this date the divide existed, when in fact many if not all of the thinkers before 1054 on both "sides" listed in this article would be "claimed" by both Catholics and Eastern Orthodox Christians. Is it possible to use two colors (red & yellow) for thinkers before the Schism? I know this list has the potential to get more convoluted and I don't mean to nitpick, but it is slightly important.

Just to give an example of one of these guys, Pope Sylvester II is listed as Catholic. That's fine, he was a Bishop of Rome in the West so it's fair to call him "Catholic". However, because he reigned before the Great Schism, Eastern Orthodox Christians also acknowledge him as a valid bishop of Rome who was very much in communion with the East and considered part of their Church (since the East and West were united at that time). So he can really be "claimed" by them as well.

97.65.51.2 (talk) 07:30, 20 July 2013 (UTC)

Come and join The Wikipedia Library

The Wikipedia Library is an open research hub, a place for organizing our amazing community of research and reference experts to collaborate and help improve the encyclopedia.

We are working together towards 5 big goals:

Connect editors with their local library and freely accessible resources

Partner to provide free access to paywalled publications, databases, universities, and libraries

Build relationships among our community of editors, libraries, and librarians

Facilitate research for Wikipedians, helping editors to find and use sources

Promote broader open access in publishing and research

Sign up to receive announcements and news about resource donations and partnerships: Sign up
Come and create your profile, and see how we can leverage your talent, expertise, and dedication: Join in

Introduce yourself :-)

-Hope to see you there, Ocaasi^{t | c} 14:59, 23 August 2013 (UTC)

Invitation to WikiProject Invention

Hello, WikiProject History of Science. You are invited to join WikiProject Invention, a WikiProject and resource dedicated to improving Wikipedia's coverage of inventions and invention-related topics. To join the project, just add your name to the member list. Northamerica1000^(talk) 02:00, 31 August 2013 (UTC)

Input welcome regarding Pseudoscience

There is an ongoing ArbCom request for clarification and amendment concerning the ArbCom's earlier decisions on Pseudoscience. One element of the resulting discussion concerns the recent insertion of a lengthy, critical template on the talk pages of a large number of articles that are categorized as Pseudoscience. Most of these talk pages concern articles providing historical discussions of, but not advocacy of, specific pseudosciences (see e.g., Talk:Flat Earth; Talk:Astrology). Input is welcome from editors who can provide brief reasoned comments on the significance of this template to historical articles. --SteveMcCluskey (talk) 21:06, 4 September 2013 (UTC)

Wikimedian-in-Residence at the Royal Society

The Royal Society, the UK's science academy, is recruiting a Wikimedian-in-Residence to help them work more closely with Wikipedia. The position is part-time (one day per week) for a fixed term of 6 months. See here for more information and details of how to apply. For additional information please contact me at francis.bacon [AT] royalsociety.org Andeggs (talk) 14:13, 23 September 2013 (UTC)

Ernst Mayr - this article needs help

Ernst Mayr has citation tags and suggestions on the talk page from 2011. Please help. Thanks! Soranoch (talk) 20:36, 16 October 2013 (UTC)

Citation Wrong

Reference (p19-20) has NOTHING to do with the quotation. I do not know how to edit...

Galileo's Leaning Tower of Pisa experiment http://wiki.alquds.edu/?query=Galileo's_Leaning_Tower_of_Pisa_experiment "According to a biography by Galileo's pupil Vincenzo Viviani, in 1589 the Italian scientist Galileo had dropped two balls of different masses from the Leaning Tower of Pisa to demonstrate that their time of descent was independent of their mass.[1] " [1] ^ Drake, S. (1978). Galileo At Work. University of Chicago Press. pp. 19–20. ISBN 0-226-16226-5.

Google Books Galileo at Work: http://books.google.com/books?id=cHNDo7p7FXQC&printsec=frontcover&dq=isbn:0226162265&hl=en&sa=X&ei=0F9IUqCvBsjH2QWboICABA&ved=0CC8Q6AEwAA#v=onepage&q&f=false — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.201.166.153 (talk) 17:39, 29 September 2013 (UTC)

@98.201.166.153: A belated thanks for pointing this out. It turns out that a later edition does contain this information, so I have corrected the citation. RockMagnetist (talk) 21:55, 16 October 2013 (UTC)

Populate: Template:Science commemorative events

Hey All, created Template:Science commemorative events to present some structure and organization about events commemorating scientific achievements. Would greatly appreciate further population to the template or the associated category, Sadads (talk) 15:42, 8 November 2013 (UTC)

History of rifling

I was reading the History of Science for the year 1500 and found a listing for Rifling requesting citation. I did some checking online and found only one site that provided a possible specific reference. It states that some sources claim that rifling was invented by Augustus Kotter of Nuremberg in 1520. No other source gave as specific possible claim. The source seems fairly solid for the subject: http://firearmshistory.blogspot.com/2010/05/rifling-history.html. Should this be updated with this information and moved to the year 1520? JCO11163 (talk) 02:40, 15 November 2013 (UTC)

Call for expert attention at "Species" article (evolutionary/organismal biology, microbial evolution, history of science)

Please see:

[Section] Request: Subject matter experts with broad understanding of species meaning across Eucarya, Archaea, and Bacteria, a/o expertise in historical development of concept

at: http://wiki.alquds.edu/?query=Talk:Species

I believe the structure of the article needs to be redesigned so that it reflects current understandings and priorities in the field, and that the quality of the article needs to be addressed to remove systemic issues (redundancy, substandard sourcing/idea appropriation/plagiarism, etc.). I will try to interest John Wilkins in providing some high level guidance [ see http://www.ucpress.edu/book.php?isbn=9780520271395 ]. In the mean time, thank you for any kind attention by true subject matter experts that might be brought to bear. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 50.179.92.36 (talk) 06:08, 25 November 2013 (UTC)

Public edit-a-thon at the Wellcome Library in London, UK

On 26th February, the Wellcome Library in London is hosting an edit-a-thon event themed around medical history, contemporary medicine and biomedical science in society. This is a free public event, with catering included, supported by Wikimedia UK and Jisc. The editing will take place 11:00 to 16:00 UTC. Follow the link for more information and online sign-up or to suggest pages for us to improve. Apologies if you see this announcement multiple times. MartinPoulter Jisc (talk) 13:48, 27 January 2014 (UTC)

One of your project's articles has been featured

Hello,
Please note that Life sciences, which is within this project's scope, has been selected as one of Today's articles for improvement. The article was scheduled to appear on Wikipedia's Community portal in the "Today's articles for improvement" section for one week, beginning today. Everyone is encouraged to collaborate to improve the article. Thanks, and happy editing!
_{Delivered by Theo's Little Bot at 01:00, 3 February 2014 (UTC) on behalf of the TAFI team}

Archived a few threads

I've archived some inactive threads to subsections which were notifications about discussions that have since been closed. — Cirt (talk) 03:11, 9 February 2014 (UTC)

Total free access to Royal Society History of Science journals for 2 days on March 4th and 5th

As Wikipedian in Residence at the Royal Society, the National Academy for the sciences of the UK, I am pleased to say that the two Royal Society History of Science journals will be fully accessible for free for 2 days on March 4th and 5th. This is in conjunction with the Women in Science Edit-a-thon on 4 March, slightly in advance of International Women's Day, on Saturday March 8th. The event is fully booked, but online participation is very welcome, and suggestions for articles relevant to the theme of "Women in Science" that need work, and topics that need coverage.

The journals will have full and free online access to all from 1am (GMT/UTC) on 4th March 2014 until 11pm (GMT/UTC) on 5th March 2014. Normally they are only free online for issues between 1 and 10 years old. They are:

The RS position is a "pilot" excercise, running between January and early July 2014. Please let me know on my talk page or the project page if you want to get involved or have suggestions. There will be further public events, as well as many for the RS's diverse audiences in the scientific community; these will be advertised first to the RS's emailing lists and Twitter feeds.

I am keen to get feedback on my personal Conflict of Interest statement for the position, and want to work out a general one for Royal Society staff in consultation with the community. Wiki at Royal Society John (talk) 12:17, 28 February 2014 (UTC)

The Royal Society Library are interested in doing something

The library at the Royal Society in London are interested in doing something related to any item in their library, in particular something to do with items in their unique collections of manuscripts, personal papers, and other material. They are thinking of items that might be good targets, but any suggestions anyone else has would be very welcome. This might be in conjunction with Wikisource, or not. Please let me know on my talk page. Thanks! Wiki at Royal Society John (talk) 18:20, 12 March 2014 (UTC)

Total free access to Royal Society History of Science journals for 2 days on March 25th and 26th !!!

As Wikipedian in Residence at the Royal Society, the National Academy for the sciences of the UK, I am again pleased to say that the two Royal Society History of Science journals will be fully accessible for free for 2 days on March 25th and 26th. This is in conjunction with the Diversity in Science Edit-a-thon on 25 March. The event is held by the Royal Society and there are currently a couple of places available, as well as online participation which is very welcome, as are suggestions for articles relevant to the theme of "Diversity in Science" that need work, and topics that need coverage.

The journals will have full and free online access to all from 1am (GMT/UTC) on 25th March 2014 until 11pm (GMT/UTC) on 26th March 2014. Normally they are only free online for issues between 1 and 10 years old. They are:

The RS position is a "pilot" excercise, running between January and early July 2014. Please let me know on my talk page or the project page if you want to get involved or have suggestions. There will be further public events in May, as well as many for the RS's diverse audiences in the scientific community; these will be advertised first to the RS's emailing lists and Twitter feeds. Wiki at Royal Society John (talk) 17:33, 24 March 2014 (UTC)

Silent Spring peer review

Wikipedia:Peer_review/Silent_Spring/archive1

Important book in the history of environmental regulations, history of pesticide usage, and environmentalism. Please offer your assessment of the article. --Harizotoh9 (talk) 13:36, 1 April 2014 (UTC)

Royal Society journals - subscription offer for one year

I'm delighted to say that the Royal Society, the UK’s National Academy for science, is offering 24 Wikipedians free access for one year to its prestigious range of scientific journals. Please note that much of the content of these journals is already freely available online, the details varying slightly between the journals – see the Royal Society Publishing webpages. For the purposes of this offer the Royal Society's journals are divided into 3 groups: Biological sciences, Physical sciences and history of science. For full details and signing-up, please see the applications page. Initial applications will close on 25 May 2014, but later applications will go on the waiting list. Wiki at Royal Society John (talk) 02:46, 29 April 2014 (UTC)

Still worth applying here! Wiki at Royal Society John (talk) 10:16, 7 May 2014 (UTC)

Another Royal Society offer

As Wikimedian in residence at the Royal Society, the UK's National Academy for the Sciences, I'm trying to organize a release of some images in various categories from their Picture Library. One of the categories is historic (out of copyright) natural history books, mainly for the illustrations. Are there particular books or other holdings that people would like to see images from, or particular images? Unfortunately much of what they have is not digitized and much of what is digitized is not presently online at the last link. The main library catalogue search page is here. Before asking, please try to see if decent quality images are not available elsewhere, as they often are, from the Library of Congress etc. This category is different from the obvious 17th-century stuff from the founding generation, and portraits, where I am clearer what to ask for, though please let me know of anything not so obvious that would be useful. Thanks, Wiki at Royal Society John (talk) 09:58, 7 May 2014 (UTC)

Move request of Melancholia

A discussion is taking place on the title of this article at Talk:Melancholia#Requested_move. All input welcome. Thank you. ^walk victor falk^talk 11:15, 23 May 2014 (UTC)

RfC: Should Nikola Tesla's birthplace be changed?

An RfC Should Tesla's birthplace be changed? has been created. Comments are welcome.- Mr X 15:48, 8 June 2014 (UTC)

New photos on Commons from the Royal Society Library

As part of Wikipedia:WikiProject Royal Society a special photo session in the Royal Society Library in London has resulted in Commons:Category:Royal Society Library, with over 50 photos of their treasures, mostly 17th century manuscripts, including several of one of Boyle's notebooks. Please add these as appropriate. Thanks! Wiki at Royal Society John (talk) 22:05, 25 June 2014 (UTC)

Leaflet for Wikiproject History of Science at Wikimania 2014

Hi all,

My name is Adi Khajuria and I am helping out with Wikimania 2014 in London.

One of our initiatives is to create leaflets to increase the discoverability of various wikimedia projects, and showcase the breadth of activity within wikimedia. Any kind of project can have a physical paper leaflet designed - for free - as a tool to help recruit new contributors. These leaflets will be printed at Wikimania 2014, and the designs can be re-used in the future at other events and locations.

This is particularly aimed at highlighting less discoverable but successful projects, e.g:

• Active Wikiprojects: Wikiproject Medicine, WikiProject Video Games, Wikiproject Film

• Tech projects/Tools, which may be looking for either users or developers.

• Less known major projects: Wikinews, Wikidata, Wikivoyage, etc.

• Wiki Loves Parliaments, Wiki Loves Monuments, Wiki Loves ____

• Wikimedia thematic organisations, Wikiwomen’s Collaborative, The Signpost

The deadline for submissions is 1st July 2014

For more information or to sign up for one for your project, go to:

Project leaflets
Adikhajuria (talk) 09:40, 27 June 2014 (UTC)

History of Science sidebar

The Template:History_of_science_sidebar is too broad for most articles. I think it works great on the History of Science article, because that article is also very broad. But it does not work on articles that are specific. For instance I just removed it from the history of evolutionary thought page. It could be replaced with a more specific sidebar that is more appropriate for that article.

I am proposing the removal of the sidebar from most articles, and possibly the creation of several more which are more specific.

--Harizotoh9 (talk) 01:36, 27 July 2014 (UTC)

Comment on the WikiProject X proposal

Hello there! As you may already know, most WikiProjects here on Wikipedia struggle to stay active after they've been founded. I believe there is a lot of potential for WikiProjects to facilitate collaboration across subject areas, so I have submitted a grant proposal with the Wikimedia Foundation for the "WikiProject X" project. WikiProject X will study what makes WikiProjects succeed in retaining editors and then design a prototype WikiProject system that will recruit contributors to WikiProjects and help them run effectively. Please review the proposal here and leave feedback. If you have any questions, you can ask on the proposal page or leave a message on my talk page. Thank you for your time! (Also, sorry about the posting mistake earlier. If someone already moved my message to the talk page, feel free to remove this posting.) Harej (talk) 22:47, 1 October 2014 (UTC)

A Simple Partnership with the Embryo Project Encyclopedia

Duplicate under discussion at Wikipedia:Village pump (proposals)#A Simple Partnership with the Embryo project Encyclopedia

I'm the editor in chief of the Embryo Project Encyclopedia, an online open access publication aimed for inclusive audiences. We propose to incorporate our content with Wikipedia pages.

Allow me first to describe the encyclopedia, then why we are posting here, and finally our proposal to partner with Wikipedia.

The Embryo Project Encyclopedia publishes articles about embryology, developmental biology, and reproductive medicine. The intended audience for the articles includes people with between roughly 9 and 16 years of education. The purpose of the encyclopedia is to increase scientific literacy among its readers about the fields of science listed above. To achieve that aim, articles in the encyclopedia use historical methods to situate scientific results in social contexts.

The encyclopedia is funded by the US National Science Foundation, and it is the product of a collaboration between the Center for Biology and Society at Arizona State University and the Marine Biological Laboratory. All articles receive rigorous peer and editorial review to be factual, non evaluative, and to connect readers to online resources for verification of contents. The publication has an ISSN of 1940-5030, all contents are Creative Commons licensed (CC BY-NC-SA 3.0), and the articles are indexed in scholarly databases like Google Scholar.

We'd like to partner our content with Wikipedia. Through various channels, we learned that that this forum provides the most appropriate venue to propose a plan to share our content on Wikipedia, but if we should instead use another means, please let us know.

The following plan describes an initial proposal.

Background We have just under 600 articles in our encyclopedia, but we publish three new articles per week.

Goal We'd like to incorporate into our editing process some steps to link our articles on relevant Wikipedia pages under 'External links' headers. For instance, as we just published an article on Francois Jacob, we'd like to include a link to it under 'External links' on the Francois Jacob Wikipedia page.

Issue In trials runs of that practice, Wikimedians have understandably deleted many of our links. They claim that such links are spam, self-promotional, and thus violate Wikipedia's principles of editing and posting. We appreciate the need for the antispamming principles, and we see how Wikimedians might construe our practices as potentially spam. We think, however, that the spirit of the antispamming principles shouldn't exclude us from linking to articles in the Embryo Project Encyclopedia. We aren't selling anything, we have no grant deliverables related to Wikipedia, nor do we bias our articles except to ensure that they they are accurate about their topics, as free from evaluation as possible, and verifiable.

Proposal

1) We'd like to designate a single Wikipedia account by which we'd post links on Wikipedia articles to articles in our encyclopedia. The one I'm using now works for that function.

2) We'd like that account to have limited immunity to the antispamming principle, in that it can be used to link to articles in the Embryo Project Encyclopedia, but no other website. Furthermore, the account can be used to link to Embryo Project Encyclopedia article only on relevant Wikipedia page. That way me might link to our Jacob article on Wikipedia's Jacob page and on it Pasteur Institute age, but not on the gauge physics page, for example.

3) We'd like other Wikimedians to be able to somehow see that limited immunity status of our account when they check our page edits.

4) We DON'T propose that such a limited-immunity account be indefeasible, and Wikimedians may still delete our links if they judge them inappropriate. We only seek to avoid deletions based on blanket application of the antispamming principle.

5) We propose a standard link syntax of:

[url (EPE Article Title)] at the Embryo Project Encyclopedia

Example:

Francois Jacob (1920-2013) at the Embryo Project Encyclopedia

Final Remarks Please treat our proposal as an initial step. No one on our editorial team has much experience with the policies and practices for Wikipedia, and we're not sure if our proposal maps on to Wikipedia's capabilities and policies. In one sense, we're not quite sure what to ask for, but given our explicit goal and the issue that prevents us from reaching it, we anticipate that you have ideas about how to move forward. Embryoproject (talk) 17:28, 11 October 2014 (UTC)

History of the various branches of natural science

Many of the natural sciences do not have history coverage on Wikipedia. That is, for many of them, there is neither an article on the history of the branch, nor a history section in the main article for the branch.

To see which branches do not have history coverage, look for the redlinks at Outline of natural science#History of natural science. The Transhumanist 02:55, 31 October 2014 (UTC)

History of medicine list

Wikipedia:WikiProject Dictionary of National Biography/Medics is a new list, around 400 missing biographies of physicians, surgeons and others (emphasis on the UK). Charles Matthews (talk) 15:19, 15 December 2014 (UTC)

Free 'RSC Gold' accounts

I am pleased to announce, as Wikimedian in Residence at the Royal Society of Chemistry, the donation of 100 "RSC Gold" accounts, for use by Wikipedia editors wishing to use RSC journal content to expand articles on chemistry-related topics. Please visit Wikipedia:RSC Gold for details, to check your eligibility, and to request an account. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 09:36, 14 January 2015 (UTC)

WikiProject X is live!

Hello everyone!

You may have received a message from me earlier asking you to comment on my WikiProject X proposal. The good news is that WikiProject X is now live! In our first phase, we are focusing on research. At this time, we are looking for people to share their experiences with WikiProjects: good, bad, or neutral. We are also looking for WikiProjects that may be interested in trying out new tools and layouts that will make participating easier and projects easier to maintain. If you or your WikiProject are interested, check us out! Note that this is an opt-in program; no WikiProject will be required to change anything against its wishes. Please let me know if you have any questions. Thank you!

Note: To receive additional notifications about WikiProject X on this talk page, please add this page to Wikipedia:WikiProject X/Newsletter. Otherwise, this will be the last notification sent about WikiProject X.

Harej (talk) 16:57, 14 January 2015 (UTC)

Looking to connect with wikimedians to consult posting external links

I'm an editor for the Embryo Project Encyclopedia and I'm following up on a discussion that you can find here; [1]

I'm looking to connect with the wikimedians who are the main editors of this page, could someone please give me some information on how I could find them? Thank you Page Historian (talk) 21:03, 26 March 2015 (UTC)

Board of Longitude has been reviewed

Hi, we have had an expert review at Talk:Board of Longitude. Ϣere SpielChequers 14:29, 15 April 2015 (UTC)

WikiProject X Newsletter • Issue 3

Greetings! For this month's issue...

We have demos!

After a lengthy research and design process, we decided for WikiProject X to focus on two things:

A WikiProject workflow that focuses on action items: discussions you can participate in and tasks you can perform to improve the encyclopedia; and
An automatically updating WikiProject directory that gives you lists of users participating in the WikiProject and editing in that subject area.

We have a live demonstration of the new WikiProject workflow at WikiProject Women in Technology, a brand new WikiProject that was set up as an adjunct to a related edit-a-thon in Washington, DC. The goal is to surface action items for editors, and we intend on doing that through automatically updated working lists. We are looking into using SuggestBot to generate lists of outstanding tasks, and we are looking into additional options for automatic worklist generation. This takes the burden off of WikiProject editors to generate these worklists, though there is also a "requests" section for Wikipedians to make individual requests. (As of writing, these automated lists are not yet live, so you will see a blank space under "edit articles" on the demo WikiProject. Sorry about that!) I invite you to check out the WikiProject and leave feedback on WikiProject X's talk page.

Once the demo is sufficiently developed, we will be working on a limited deployment on our pilot WikiProjects. We have selected five for the first round of testing based on the highest potential for impact and will scale up from there.

While a re-designed WikiProject experience is much needed, that alone isn't enough. A WikiProject isn't any good if people have no way of discovering it. This is why we are also developing an automatically updated WikiProject directory. This directory will surface project-related metrics, including a count of active WikiProject participants and of active editors in that project's subject area. The purpose of these metrics is to highlight how active the WikiProject is at the given point of time, but also to highlight that project's potential for success. The directory is not yet live but there is a demonstration featuring a sampling of WikiProjects.

Each directory entry will link to a WikiProject description page which automatically list the active WikiProject participants and subject-area article editors. This allows Wikipedians to find each other based on the areas they are interested in, and this information can be used to revive a WikiProject, start a new one, or even for some other purpose. These description pages are not online yet, but they will use this template, if you want to get a feel of what they will look like.

We need volunteers!

WikiProject X is a huge undertaking, and we need volunteers to support our efforts, including testers and coders. Check out our volunteer portal and see what you can do to help us!

As an aside...

Wouldn't it be cool if lists of requested articles could not only be integrated directly with WikiProjects, but also shared between WikiProjects? Well, we got the crazy idea of having experimental software feature Flow deployed (on a totally experimental basis) on the new Article Request Workshop, which seeks to be a place where editors can "workshop" article ideas before they get created. It uses Flow because Flow allows, essentially, section-level categorization, and in the future will allow "sections" (known as "topics" within Flow) to be included across different pages. What this means is that you have a recommendation for a new article tagged by multiple WikiProjects, allowing for the recommendation to appear on lists for each WikiProject. This will facilitate inter-WikiProject collaboration and will help to reduce duplicated work. The Article Request Workshop is not entirely ready yet due to some bugs with Flow, but we hope to integrate it into our pilot WikiProjects at some point.

Harej (talk) 01:58, 19 April 2015 (UTC)

RfC: Nikola Tesla

BAn RFC: Should all discussions and proposals about Nikola Tesla's nationality, ethnicity and country of birth (broadly construed) be limited to the sub-page: Talk:Nikola Tesla/Nationality and ethnicity? has been posted here. Interested editors are invited to comment.- Mr X 20:56, 1 June 2015 (UTC)

WikiProject X Newsletter • Issue 4

Newsletter • May/June 2015

Hello friends! We have been hard at work these past two months. For this report:

The directory is live!

For the first time, we are happy to bring you an exhaustive, comprehensive WikiProject Directory. This directory endeavors to list every single WikiProject on the English Wikipedia, including those that don't participate in article assessment. In constructing the broadest possible definition, we have come up with a list of approximately 2,600 WikiProjects. The directory tracks activity statistics on the WikiProject's pages, and, for where it's available, statistics on the number of articles tracked by the WikiProject and the number of editors active on those articles. Complementing the directory are description pages for each project, listing usernames of people active on the WikiProject pages and the articles in the WikiProject's scope. This will help Wikipedians interested in a subject find each other, whether to seek feedback on an article or to revive an old project. (There is an opt-out option.) We have also come up with listings of related WikiProjects, listing the ten most relevant WikiProjects based on what articles they have in common. We would like to promote WikiProjects as interconnected systems, rather than isolated silos.

A tremendous amount of work went into preparing this directory. WikiProjects do not consistently categorize their pages, meaning we had to develop our own index to match WikiProjects with the articles in their scope. We also had to make some adjustments to how WikiProjects were categorized; indeed, I personally have racked up a few hundred edits re-categorizing WikiProjects. There remains more work to be done to make the WikiProject directory truly useful. In the meantime, take a look and feel free to leave feedback at the WikiProject X talk page.

Stuff in the works!

What have we been working on?

A new design template—This has been in the works for a while, of course. But our goal is to design something that is useful and cleanly presented on all browsers and at all screen resolutions while working within the confines of what MediaWiki has to offer. Additionally, we are working on designs for the sub-components featured on the main project page.
A new WikiProject talk page banner in Lua—Work has begun on implementing the WikiProject banner in Lua. The goal is to create a banner template that can be usable by any WikiProject in lieu of having its own template. Work has slowed down for now to focus on higher priority items, but we are interested in your thoughts on how we could go about creating a more useful project banner. We have a draft module on Test Wikipedia, with a demonstration.
New discussion reports—We have over 4.8 million articles on the English Wikipedia, and almost as many talk pages as well. But what happens when someone posts on a talk page? What if no one is watching that talk page? We are currently testing out a system for an automatically-updating new discussions list, like RFC for WikiProjects. We currently have five test pages up for the WikiProjects on cannabis, cognitive science, evolutionary biology, and Ghana.
SuggestBot for WikiProjects—We have asked the maintainer of SuggestBot to make some minor adjustments to SuggestBot that will allow it to post regular reports to those WikiProjects that ask for them. Stay tuned!
Semi-automated article assessment—Using the new revision scoring service and another system currently under development, WikiProjects will be getting a new tool to facilitate the article assessment process by providing article quality/importance predictions for articles yet to be assessed. Aside from helping WikiProjects get through their backlogs, the goal is to help WikiProjects with collecting metrics and triaging their work. Semi-automation of this process will help achieve consistent results and keep the process running smoothly, as automation does on other parts of Wikipedia.

Want us to work on any other tools? Interested in volunteering? Leave a note on our talk page.

The WikiProject watchers report is back!

The database report which lists WikiProjects according to the number of watchers (i.e., people that have the project on their watchlist), is back! The report stopped being updated a year ago, following the deactivation of the Toolserver, but a replacement report has been generated.

Until next time, Harej (talk) 22:20, 17 June 2015 (UTC)

"Latin"

The usage and topic of Latin is under discussion, see talk:Latin -- 67.70.32.20 (talk) 05:03, 8 July 2015 (UTC)

Georg Forster

It would be great if folks could comment as to whether this article currently meets FA criteria at Wikipedia:Featured article review/Georg Forster/archive1. cheers, Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 05:30, 13 August 2015 (UTC)

Discussion about whether to deprecate Template:Cite doi

Template:Cite doi allows editors to generate a citation from a digital object identifier. There is a discussion about whether to deprecate this template. Since doi's are used the sciences and this is a science WikiProject, I am inviting anyone here to comment. Blue Rasberry (talk) 14:26, 9 September 2015 (UTC)

Merging science and technology categories

FYI, there is a suggestion to merge the history of science and history of technology category trees, see WP:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2015_September_12#Science_and_technology -- 70.51.202.113 (talk) 05:14, 14 September 2015 (UTC)

WikiProject X Newsletter • Issue 5

Newsletter • October 2015

Hello there! Happy to be writing this newsletter once more. This month:

We did it!

In July, we launched five pilot WikiProjects: WikiProjects Cannabis, Evolutionary Biology, Ghana, Hampshire, and Women's Health. We also use the new design, named "WPX UI," on WikiProject Women in Technology, Women in Red, WikiProject Occupational Safety and Health. We are currently looking for projects for the next round of testing. If you are interested, please sign up on the Pilots page.

Shortly after our launch we presented at Wikimania 2015. Our slides are on Wikimedia Commons.

Then after all that work, we went through the process of figuring out whether we accomplished our goal. We reached out to participants on the redesigned WikiProjects, and we asked them to complete a survey. (If you filled out your survey—thank you!) While there are still some issues with the WikiProject tools and the new design, there appears to be general satisfaction (at least among those who responded). The results of the survey and more are documented in our grant report filed with the Wikimedia Foundation.

The work continues!

There is more work that needs to be done, so we have applied for a renewal of our grant. Comments on the proposal are welcome. We would like to improve what we have already started on the English Wikipedia and to also expand to Wikimedia Commons and Wikidata. Why those? Because they are multilingual projects and because there needs to be better coordination across Wikimedia projects. More details are available in the renewal proposal.

How can the Wikimedia Foundation support WikiProjects?

The Wikimedia Developer Summit will be held in San Francisco in January 2016. The recently established Community Tech team at the Wikimedia Foundation is interested in investigating what technical support they can provide for WikiProjects, i.e., support beyond just templates and bots. I have plenty of opinions myself, but I want to hear what you think. The session is being planned on Phabricator, the Wikimedia bug tracker. If you are not familiar with Phabricator, you can log in with your Wikipedia username and password through the "Login or Register: MediaWiki" button on the login page. Your feedback can help make editing Wikipedia a better experience.

Until next time,

Harej (talk) 09:03, 26 October 2015 (UTC)

A-Class review for Chicago Pile-1 needs attention

A few more editors are needed to complete the A-Class review for Chicago Pile-1; please stop by and help review the article! Thanks! AustralianRupert (talk) 04:31, 18 December 2015 (UTC)

A-Class review for Nike-X needs attention

A few more editors are needed to complete the A-Class review for Nike-X; please stop by and help review the article! Thanks! AustralianRupert (talk) 04:31, 18 December 2015 (UTC)

Template:Isaac Newton

I seem to have bitten off a bit more than I can chew in creating {{Isaac Newton}}. Are there any experts on the relevant subjects that could help to sensibly organize the template.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 17:59, 9 October 2015 (UTC)

I have cobbled together what I can for this template. It would help to have eyes on it. It would likely benefit from rearranging by an expert.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 19:18, 13 October 2015 (UTC)

I would suggest moving the Newtonianism section to the top, as that is what he is "most notable" for. The publications are details supporting the notability, but the articles about the philosophy give a more general introduction and context to his ideas. Articles like Newton's law of universal gravitation are more welcoming to someone unfamiliar with his work than the more difficult Philosophiæ Naturalis Principia Mathematica. I would also be tempted to put Discoveries and Inventions second, with Publications following that. The order of links within each section feels a bit chaotic and I had difficulty finding some topics. It could be alphabetically organized, possibly with the more important subjects highlighted at the start of the list. But there should be some consistency. Is there a style guide for these sorts of templates? As an aside, Newtonianism is prominently linked but is a rather incomplete stub. I tagged it as part of this project and will into improving it. I didn't check to see how complete the template coverage is. --mikeu ^talk 18:59, 14 January 2016 (UTC)

WikiProject X Newsletter • Issue 6

Newsletter • January 2016

Hello there! Happy to be writing this newsletter once more. This month:

What comes next

Some good news: the Wikimedia Foundation has renewed WikiProject X. This means we can continue focusing on making WikiProjects better.

During our first round of work, we created a prototype WikiProject based on two ideas: (1) WikiProjects should clearly present things for people to do, and (2) The content of WikiProjects should be automated as much as possible. We launched pilots, and for the most part it works. But this approach will not work for the long term. While it makes certain aspects of running a WikiProject easier, it makes the maintenance aspects harder.

We are working on a major overhaul that will address these issues. New features will include:

Creating WikiProjects by simply filling out a form, choosing which reports you want to generate for your project. This will work with existing bots in addition to the Reports Bot reports. (Of course, you can also have sections curated by humans.)
One-click button to join a WikiProject, with optional notifications.
Be able to define your WikiProject's scope within the WikiProject itself by listing relevant pages and categories, eliminating the need to tag every talk page with a banner. (You will still be allowed to do that, of course. It just won't be required.)

The end goal is a collaboration tool that can be used by WikiProjects but also by any edit-a-thon or group of people that want to coordinate on improving articles. Though implemented as an extension, the underlying content will be wikitext, meaning that you can continue to use categories, templates, and other features as you normally would.

This will take a lot of work, and we are just getting started. What would you like to see? I invite you to discuss on our talk page.

Until next time,

Harej (talk) 02:53, 20 January 2016 (UTC)

Suggested merge of Ancient technology into Prehistoric technology and History of technology

"Ancient technology" seems to have started as a dab page, and now duplicates material found in "Prehistoric technology" and "History of technology", which are much better articles. I've started a discussion at Talk:Prehistoric technology about this. Doug Weller talk 15:01, 24 January 2016 (UTC)

Outbreak-related requested move discussions

There are a few outbreak-related WP:RM discussions going on.

Feedback would be welcome! larryv (talk) 04:01, 27 January 2016 (UTC)

WikiProject X Newsletter • Issue 7

Newsletter • February 2016

This month:

One database for Wikipedia requests

Development of the extension for setting up WikiProjects, as described in the last issue of this newsletter, is currently underway. No terribly exciting news on this front.

In the meantime, we are working on a prototype for a new service we hope to announce soon. The problem: there are requests scattered all across Wikipedia, including requests for new articles and requests for improvements to existing articles. We Wikipedians are very good at coming up with lists of things to do. But once we write these lists, where do they end up? How can we make them useful for all editors—even those who do not browse the missing articles lists, or the particular WikiProjects that have lists?

Introducing Wikipedia Requests, a new tool to centralize the various lists of requests around Wikipedia. Requests will be tagged by category and WikiProject, making it easier to find requests based on what your interests are. Accompanying this service will be a bot that will let you generate reports from this database on any wiki page, including WikiProjects. This means that once a request is filed centrally, it can syndicated all throughout Wikipedia, and once it is fulfilled, it will be marked as "complete" throughout Wikipedia. The idea for this service came about when I saw that it was easy to put together to-do lists based on database queries, but it was harder to do this for human-generated requests when those requests are scattered throughout the wiki, siloed throughout several pages. This should especially be useful for WikiProjects that have overlapping interests.

The newsletter this month is fairly brief; not a lot of news, just checking in to say that we are hard at work and hope to have more for you soon.

Until next time,

Harej (talk) 01:44, 24 February 2016 (UTC)

"Timeline of meteorology"

Timeline of meteorology has been requested to be renamed, see talk:Timeline of meteorology -- 70.51.46.39 (talk) 03:56, 25 March 2016 (UTC)

WikiProject X Newsletter • Issue 8

Newsletter • March / April 2016

This month:

Transclude article requests anywhere on Wikipedia

In the last issue of the WikiProject X Newsletter, I discussed the upcoming Wikipedia Requests system: a central database for outstanding work on Wikipedia. I am pleased to announce Wikipedia Requests is live! Its purpose is to supplement automatically generated lists, such as those from SuggestBot, Reports bot, or Wikidata. It is currently being demonstrated on WikiProject Occupational Safety and Health (which I work on as part of my NIOSH duties) and WikiProject Women scientists.

Adding a request is as simple as filling out a form. Just go to the Add form to add your request. Adding sources will help ensure that your request is fulfilled more quickly. And when a request is fulfilled, simply click "mark as complete" and it will be removed from all the lists it's on. All at the click of a button! (If anyone is concerned, all actions are logged.)

With this new service is a template to transclude these requests: {{Wikipedia Requests}}. It's simple to use: add the template to a page, specifying article=, category=, or wikiproject=, and the list will be transcluded. For example, for requests having to do with all living people, just do {{Wikipedia Requests|category=Living people}}. Use these lists on WikiProjects but also for edit-a-thons where you want a convenient list of things to do on hand. Give it a shot!

Help us build our list!

The value of Wikipedia Requests comes from being a centralized database. The long work to migrating individual lists into this combined list is slowly underway. As of writing, we have 883 open tasks logged in Wikipedia Requests. We need your help building this list.

If you know of a list of missing articles, or of outstanding tasks for existing articles, that you would like to migrate to this new system, head on over to Wikipedia:Wikipedia Requests#Transition project and help out. Doing this will help put your list in front of more eyes—more than just your own WikiProject.

An open database means new tools

WikiProject X maintains a database that associates article talk pages (and draft talk pages) with WikiProjects. This database powers many of the reports that Reports bot generates. However, until very recently, this database was not made available to others who might find its data useful. It's only common sense to open up the database and let others build tools with it.

And indeed: Citation Hunt, the game to add citations to Wikipedia, now lets you filter by WikiProject, using the data from our database.

Are you a tool developer interested in using this? Here are some details: the database resides on Tool Labs with the name s52475__wpx_p. The table that associates WikiProjects with articles and drafts is called projectindex. Pages are stored by talk page title but in the future this should change. Have fun!

On the horizon

The work on the CollaborationKit extension continues. The extension will initially focus on reducing template and Lua bloat on WikiProjects (especially our WPX UI demonstration projects), and will from there create custom interfaces for creating and maintaining WikiProjects.
The WikiCite meeting will be in Berlin in May. The goal of the meeting is to figure out how to build a bibliographic database for use on the Wikimedia projects. This fits in quite nicely with WikiProject X's work: we want to make it easier for people to find things to work on, and with a powerful, open bibliographic database, we can build recommendations for sources. This feature was requested by the Wikipedia Library back in September, and this meeting is a major next step. We look forward to seeing what comes out of this meeting.

Until next time,

Harej (talk) 01:29, 20 April 2016 (UTC)

WikiProject X Newsletter • Issue 9

Newsletter • May / June 2016

Check out this month's issue of the WikiProject X newsletter, featuring the first screenshot of our new CollaborationKit software!

Harej (talk) 00:23, 25 June 2016 (UTC)

GAR for Tycho Brahe

Tycho Brahe, an article that you or your project may be interested in, has been nominated for an individual good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. More details are available on the re-assessment page. Please ping me if you need anything as my watchlist is already quite large and I'd prefer not to add seven or eight more wikiprojects to my watchlist on top of the ones that I already have. Mr rnddude (talk) 23:36, 2 September 2016 (UTC)

Proposal: Reinstate the "Years in science" WikiProject

The Years in science WikiProject has been marked defunct for 6 years. I think there is benefit in having the project available as a place to discuss future evolution of the "YYYY in science" pages.

If you have thoughts, please join the discussion in the WikiProject Years in science talk page.

Metawade (talk) 18:50, 17 October 2016 (UTC)

Museo Galileo stubs

@Winged Blades of Godric: A series of pretty minimal stubs were created last year by @Archeologo (Museo Galileo):, "Wikipedian in Residence" at the Museo Galileo, mostly by copying the museum's catalogue entries for individual items (with OTRS permission), with no reference to anything beyond the walls of that museum. Several are now at AfD: see User_talk:Archeologo_(Museo_Galileo). I've done some work to rescue John Cuff (optician) (country bias showing up here- but he's in ODNB and multiple museum collections, so clearly notable), and Girolamo della Volpaia (though a useful-looking ref turned out to be on the spam blacklist). It's not my field particularly so if anyone from this project feels like having a go at some 16h-century instrument makers and their products, please do so! You can see the PROD and AfD notifications at User talk:Archeologo (Museo Galileo). None of them have at present got your project banner on talk page, so I'll go through and add it. PamD 09:44, 28 February 2017 (UTC)

Will also add the WP Measurement banner, although it's "Believed to be inactive", just in case. PamD 09:47, 28 February 2017 (UTC)

Done, and WP Biography too where relevant, for all the articles mentioned on that editor's talk page (not just PROD and AfD but links to dab pages etc) - but I think there are probably dozens more out there. PamD 10:10, 28 February 2017 (UTC)

WikiProject X Newsletter • Issue 10

Issue 10 of the WikiProject X newsletter is here!

This month, we discuss the new CollaborationKit extension. Here's an image as a teaser:

23:59, 3 March 2017 (UTC)

Astronomical symbols for secondary planets?

Does anyone have the 17th-century astronomical symbols for the secondary planets, the Cosmica Sidera and Sidera Lodoicea? And if so, can you upload them to Commons? -- 70.51.200.162 (talk) 03:43, 21 March 2017 (UTC)

Comment on Proposal for WikiProject STS!

Hi WikiProject History of Science!

I've just proposed WikiProject STS to be a sort of sister group to this very project. I have no idea if it's a good idea to split STS off into its own WikiProject, given the existence of this one, but hey, I thought it was worth a suggestion.

I'd appreciate if you took a look at the proposal and commented on it! We'd be a relatively small project, but if we can find 10 or so people who'd be willing to help out, we could get started on organizing the project!

I'm also open to the creation of a task force within this WikiProject, or within wikipedia:WikiProject Science or Wikipedia:WikiProject Technology if we thought that'd be better given the scope. Again, let me know what you think!

Mathmitch7 (talk) 04:13, 16 November 2017 (UTC)

Discussion at Talk:History of science

There is a discussion at Talk:History of science#"Science in the periphery" to which editors are invited. Chiswick Chap (talk) 15:31, 6 December 2017 (UTC)

Request for good article review - Domestication of the Syrian hamster

Please see Domestication of the Syrian hamster, an article in the scope of this WikiProject.

I am seeking a good article review the article at Talk:Domestication of the Syrian hamster/GA1. I have been working on this article for some years. I have not researched every thread to its end, but I have gone far enough to feel that I should seek a review and feedback. I would be grateful for whatever comments anyone would share about the article. Thanks. Blue Rasberry (talk) 16:04, 26 December 2017 (UTC)

WikiProject X Newsletter • Issue 11

Newsletter • February 2018

Check out this month's issue of the WikiProject X newsletter, with plans to renew work with a followup grant proposal to support finalising the deployment of CollaborationKit!

-— Isarra ༆ 21:26, 14 February 2018 (UTC)

Seeking feedback on a guide for students who edit articles in science communication

Hello! The Wiki Education Foundation is developing a guide to help students write about all topics related to science communication. The handout is meant to supplement other resources that they consult, such as an interactive training and basic editing brochures. We’d appreciate any community feedback on the draft, which you can find here: User:Cassidy (Wiki Ed)/Science communication. Ideally, we’ll send this to the printer mid-March, so feedback by March 12, 2018 would be greatly appreciated. Thank you! —Cassidy (Wiki Ed) (talk) 17:52, 6 March 2018 (UTC)

John Harrison

We have an issue with his brithdate, see talk page, our article previously had March 24 (as do several books found with Google (hah!)), but Google Doodle says it's today and so there is now many sources that say today, but maybe its a Gregorian Calendar issue - if you have access to British sources in particular - that might help. Alanscottwalker (talk) 15:43, 3 April 2018 (UTC)

Comment on Proposal for WikiProject STS!

(Reposted from Archive)Hi WikiProject History of Science! I've just proposed WikiProject STS to be a sort of sister group to this very project. I have no idea if it's a good idea to split STS off into its own WikiProject, given the existence of this one, but hey, I thought it was worth a suggestion. I'd appreciate if you took a look at the proposal and commented on it! We'd be a relatively small project, but if we can find 10 or so people who'd be willing to help out, we could get started on organizing the project! I'm also open to the creation of a task force within this WikiProject, or within wikipedia:WikiProject Science or Wikipedia:WikiProject Technology if we thought that'd be better given the scope. Again, let me know what you think! (Originally posted by Mathmitch7 (talk) 04:13, 16 November 2017 (UTC))

I've recently been considering this becoming a WP:Taskforce within WP:SCIHIST, coordinated jointly with WP:Sociology, WP:Technology and WP:Science. I suppose that this would involve creating a sub-page on this project. What do people think?- - mathmitch7 ^{(talk/contribs)} 19:08, 9 May 2018 (UTC)

WikiProject collaboration notice from the Portals WikiProject

The reason I am contacting you is because there are one or more portals that fall under this subject, and the Portals WikiProject is currently undertaking a major drive to automate portals that may affect them.

Portals are being redesigned.

The new design features are being applied to existing portals.

At present, we are gearing up for a maintenance pass of portals in which the introduction section will be upgraded to no longer need a subpage. In place of static copied and pasted excerpts will be self-updating excerpts displayed through selective transclusion, using the template {{Transclude lead excerpt}}.

The discussion about this can be found here.

Maintainers of specific portals are encouraged to sign up as project members here, noting the portals they maintain, so that those portals are skipped by the maintenance pass. Currently, we are interested in upgrading neglected and abandoned portals. There will be opportunity for maintained portals to opt-in later, or the portal maintainers can handle upgrading (the portals they maintain) personally at any time.

Background

On April 8th, 2018, an RfC ("Request for comment") proposal was made to eliminate all portals and the portal namespace. On April 17th, the Portals WikiProject was rebooted to handle the revitalization of the portal system. On May 12th, the RfC was closed with the result to keep portals, by a margin of about 2 to 1 in favor of keeping portals.

There's an article in the current edition of the Signpost interviewing project members about the RfC and the Portals WikiProject.

Since the reboot, the Portals WikiProject has been busy building tools and components to upgrade portals.

So far, 84 editors have joined.

If you would like to keep abreast of what is happening with portals, see the newsletter archive.

If you have any questions about what is happening with portals or the Portals WikiProject, please post them on the WikiProject's talk page.

Thank you. — The Transhumanist 07:41, 30 May 2018 (UTC)

Arthur Gobineau

Members of this project may be interested in this discussion. Beyond My Ken (talk) 02:54, 4 June 2018 (UTC)

Discussion at Talk:Modern history#Image use is excessive

You are invited to join the discussion at Talk:Modern history#Image use is excessive. -- Marchjuly (talk) 07:16, 31 July 2018 (UTC)

WikiProject X Newsletter • Issue 12

Newsletter • August 2018

This month: WikiProject X: The resumption

Work has resumed on WikiProject X and CollaborationKit, backed by a successfully funded Project Grant. For more information on the current status and planned work, please see this month's issue of the newsletter!

-— Isarra ༆ 22:24, 30 August 2018 (UTC)

Featured quality source review RFC

Editors in this WikiProject may be interested in the featured quality source review RFC that has been ongoing. It would change the featured article candidate process (FAC) so that source reviews would need to occur prior to any other reviews for FAC. Your comments are appreciated. --Izno Repeat (talk) 21:48, 11 November 2018 (UTC)

WikiProject X Newsletter • Issue 13

Newsletter • December 2018

This month: A general update.

The current status of the project is as follows:

Progress of the project has been generally delayed since September due to development issues (more bitrot than expected, some of the code just being genuinely confusing, etc) and personal injury (I suffered a concussion in October and was out of commission for almost two months as a result).
I currently expect to be putting out a proper call for CollaborationKit pilots in January/February, with estimated deployment in February/March if things don't go horribly wrong (they will, though, don't worry). As a part of that, I will properly update the page and send out announcement and reach out to all projects already signed up as pilots for WikiProject X in general, at which point those (still) interested can volunteer specifically to test the CollaborationKit extension.
- Wikipedia:WikiProject X/Pilots was originally created for the first WikiProject X prototype, and given this is where the project has since gone, it's only logical to continue to use it. While I haven't yet updated the page to properly reflect this:
- If you want to add your project to this page now, feel free. Just bear in mind that more information what to actually expect will be added later/included in the announcement, because by then I will have a much better idea myself.
Until then, you can find me in my corner working on making the CollaborationKit code do what we want and not just what we told it, per the workboard.

Until next time,

-— Isarra ༆ 22:44, 20 December 2018 (UTC)

Request for comment on infobox inclusion at Fermat's Last Theorem

An RfC has been opened for the inclusion of Template:Infobox mathematical statement at Fermat's Last Theorem:

Talk:Fermat's Last Theorem#Request for comment (RfC) on inclusion of Infobox mathematical statement.

It pertains to some of the historical content in the article in case editors here may be interested. Comments are most welcome. — MarkH21 (talk) 07:45, 19 March 2019 (UTC)

A new newsletter directory is out!

A new Newsletter directory has been created to replace the old, out-of-date one. If your WikiProject and its taskforces have newsletters (even inactive ones), or if you know of a missing newsletter (including from sister projects like WikiSpecies), please include it in the directory! The template can be a bit tricky, so if you need help, just post the newsletter on the template's talk page and someone will add it for you.

– Sent on behalf of Headbomb. 03:11, 11 April 2019 (UTC)

Nomination of Portal:Modern history for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether Portal:Modern history is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The page will be discussed at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Portal:Modern history until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the page during the discussion, including to improve the page to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the deletion notice from the top of the page. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 11:05, 8 May 2019 (UTC)

Nomination of Portal:Chronology for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether Portal:Chronology is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The page will be discussed at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Portal:Chronology until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the page during the discussion, including to improve the page to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the deletion notice from the top of the page. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 11:58, 25 May 2019 (UTC)

Nomination of Portal:Modern history for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether Portal:Modern history is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The page will be discussed at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Portal:Modern history until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the page during the discussion, including to improve the page to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the deletion notice from the top of the page. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 11:05, 8 May 2019 (UTC)

Nomination of Portal:Chronology for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether Portal:Chronology is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The page will be discussed at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Portal:Chronology until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the page during the discussion, including to improve the page to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the deletion notice from the top of the page. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 11:58, 25 May 2019 (UTC)

A possible Science/STEM User Group

There's a discussion about a possible User Group for STEM over at Meta:Talk:STEM_Wiki_User_Group. The idea would be to help coordinate, collaborate and network cross-subject, cross-wiki and cross-language to share experience and resources that may be valuable to the relevant wikiprojects. Current discussion includes preferred scope and structure. T.Shafee(Evo&Evo)^talk 02:55, 26 May 2019 (UTC)

Eddington experiment

Dropping a note off here in case any editors are interested in helping out at Eddington experiment, an article I recently put in mainspace - it is the 100th anniversary of the eclipse observations in two days time. The article may seem a bit disjointed, as it is an old draft I started over ten years ago. Any help improving the article would be much appreciated. Carcharoth (talk) 13:50, 27 May 2019 (UTC)

WikiProject X Newsletter • Issue 14

Newsletter • June 2019

Updates: I've been focusing largely on the development side of things, so we are a lot closer now to being ready to actually start discussing deploying it and testing it out here.

There's just a few things left that need to be resolved:

A bunch of language support issues in particular, plus some other release blockers, such as the fact that currently there's no good way to find any hubs people do create.
We also probably need some proper documentation and examples up to even reference if we want a meaningful discussion. We have the extension documentation and some test projects, but we probably need a bit more. Also I need to be able to even find the test projects! How can I possibly write reports about this stuff if I can't find any of it?!

Some other stuff that's happened in the meantime:

Midpoint report is out for this round of the project, if you want to read in too much detail about all the problems I've been running into.
WikiProject Molecular Biology have successfully set up using the old module system that CollaborationKit is intended to replace (eventually), and it even seems to work, so go them. Based on the issues they ran into, it looks like the members signup thing on that system has some of the same problems as we've been unable to resolve in CK, though, which is... interesting. (Need to change the content model to the right thing for the formwizard config to take. Ugh, content models.)

Until next time,

-— Isarra ༆ 21:43, 21 June 2019 (UTC)

Call for portal maintainers

Are there any editors from this WikiProject willing to maintain Portal:History of science? The Portals guideline requires that portals be maintained, and as a result numerous portals have been recently been deleted via MfD largely becasue of lack of maintenance. Let me know either way, and thanks, UnitedStatesian (talk) 07:46, 25 August 2019 (UTC)

WikiProject X Newsletter • Issue 15

Newsletter • September 2019

A final update, for now:

The third grant-funded round of WikiProject X has been completed. Unfortunately, while this round has not resulted in a deployed product, I am not planning to resume working on the project for the foreseeable future. Please see the final report for more information.

Regards,

-— Isarra ༆ 19:24, 29 September 2019 (UTC)

Mendelian inheritance

FYI

– Pointer to relevant discussion elsewhere.

Please see several recent threads at Talk:Mendelian inheritance, all initiated by Sciencia58 (talk · contribs) at or since 11:15, 30 September 2019 (UTC). --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 20:48, 17 October 2019 (UTC)

Request for information on WP1.0 web tool

Hello and greetings from the maintainers of the WP 1.0 Bot! As you may or may not know, we are currently involved in an overhaul of the bot, in order to make it more modern and maintainable. As part of this process, we will be rewriting the web tool that is part of the project. You might have noticed this tool if you click through the links on the project assessment summary tables.

We'd like to collect information on how the current tool is used by....you! How do you yourself and the other maintainers of your project use the web tool? Which of its features do you need? How frequently do you use these features? And what features is the tool missing that would be useful to you? We have collected all of these questions at this Google form where you can leave your response. Walkerma (talk) 04:24, 27 October 2019 (UTC)

More eyes needed at Talk:Race and intelligence

Editors who watchlist the article Scientific racism might be interested in looking at the related article Race and intelligence, which has been an area of contentious debate and edit-warring. (It is currently locked down for 3 days.) While Scientific racism is, I think, a good example of how Wikipedia handles fringe, the article Race and intelligence has a very different tone and content, as is clear from the first paragraph of the lede. See also Race and intelligence#The Jensenism debates. I'm putting this notice on all the WikiProjects that list Scientific racism as of high importance, in the hope that more editors will participate in discussions at Talk:Race and intelligence and help make the article compliant with WP:NPOV and WP:FRINGE. The problems at Race and intelligence were discussed off-wiki here: [2]. Thanks. NightHeron (talk) 13:35, 31 January 2020 (UTC)

AfD discussion of Race and intelligence

A discussion is taking place of whether to delete the article Race and intelligence, see [3]. NightHeron (talk) 12:21, 3 February 2020 (UTC)

List of Chinese inventions

I have nominated List of Chinese inventions for featured list removal here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets the featured list criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks; editors may declare to "Keep" or "Delist" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Gun Powder Ma (talk) 18:42, 8 April 2020 (UTC)

Rockefeller University edits

WikiProject Universities members are invited to review my request at Talk:Rockefeller University. I'm an employee of Rockefeller University so I have a conflict of interest. I am happy to answer questions on the article's talk page. Thanks! KFenzRockefeller (talk) 16:15, 24 August 2020 (UTC)

Bit of help needed with historical understanding Earth

Earth is currently undergoing a featured article review. There is one paragraph about the historical understanding of Earth that feels very Eurocentric, and is based on old scholarship. Anybody here could give the hand to see whether this paragraph is still valid or should be improved? a discussion was started. Femke Nijsse (talk) 08:30, 27 October 2020 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Hermeticism (history of science)

The article Hermeticism (history of science) has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

What Treharne wrote on the talk page in 2010 is exactly right: in the scholarly literature, this is called the Yates hypothesis or the Yates paradigm (after the work of Dame Frances Yates), but certainly not "Hermeticism"; the relevant articles on Wikipedia are by far not advanced enough to have a separate article on this.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Apaugasma (talk|contribs) 23:18, 15 January 2021 (UTC)

I posted this here because the original author of the article has been blocked since 2009, and there are no other major contributors. I didn't know that the template would be so wearisome, next time I'll post a more personal message. Apaugasma (talk|contribs) 23:22, 15 January 2021 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Sandbox organiser

Sandbox Organiser

A place to help you organise your work

Hi all

I've been working on a tool for the past few months that you may find useful. Wikipedia:Sandbox organiser is a set of tools to help you better organise your draft articles and other pages in your userspace. It also includes areas to keep your to do lists, bookmarks, list of tools. You can customise your sandbox organiser to add new features and sections. Once created you can access it simply by clicking the sandbox link at the top of the page. You can create and then customise your own sandbox organiser just by clicking the button on the page. All ideas for improvements and other versions would be really appreciated.

Huge thanks to PrimeHunter and NavinoEvans for their work on the technical parts, without them it wouldn't have happened.

Hope its helpful

John Cummings (talk) 11:30, 6 February 2021 (UTC)

G. Ledyard Stebbins Featured article review

I have nominated G. Ledyard Stebbins for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Delist" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 00:25, 14 February 2021 (UTC)

Del discussion

Hi.

Made a mistake, http://web.archive.org/web/20210218085000/http://wiki.alquds.edu/?query=Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Directory/Description/WikiProject_History_of_Science .

Pls feel free to delete offending pg. Btw, discussion is over, sorry if you could not see this in time. Cheers, Ema--or (talk) 19:26, 18 February 2021 (UTC)

National Physical Laboratory (United Kingdom)

Highlighting this article as a potential for taking to Good Article standard. There are plenty of reliable sources, some in the further reading section, lots of work needed, and it would be an interesting article I think and a valuable addition. Whizz40 (talk) 11:40, 25 February 2021 (UTC)

Removal of WikiProject mention in Pedro Paulet

There is a mention of the WikiProject History of Science on the Talk:Pedro Paulet page, and—based on reliably sourced references—I don't see the connection. I'm removing the WikiProject ref from the Paulet page. I'm not absolutely sure about this removal (unlike removing Paulet from the Aviation and Physics WikiProjects, which is pretty clearcut), so I thought I'd say something here, in case someone else wants to weigh in on it. Cheers! — UncleBubba ^{( T @ C )} 15:18, 20 March 2021 (UTC)

Pavlovsk Experimental Station could use some love

No idea if this is how things are done, but I came across Pavlovsk Experimental Station and feel it might be worthy of some prioritization. The story of the scientists who starved rather than eat the seeds was dramatized in Cosmos: Possible Worlds. Assuming they used reliable sources, I have to assume that there is much more to say about the event than a single paragraph. The defense of the seeds lasted years and 12 scientists died of starvation protecting them.

This article is related, but I'm not sure how the two institutes are related. https://wiki.alquds.edu/?query=Institute_of_Plant_Industry#Siege_of_Leningrad

Anonymous-232 (talk) 20:02, 21 March 2021 (UTC)

Discussion at Jabir ibn Hayyan

There is a discussion at Jabir ibn Hayyan about whether to include the title "father of early chemistry". Members of this WikiProject are kindly invited to express their opinion. Apaugasma (talk|contribs) 13:39, 27 March 2021 (UTC)

FAR of History of timekeeping devices

I have nominated History of timekeeping devices for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Delist" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. FemkeMilene (talk) 20:05, 23 April 2021 (UTC)

FAR for Leonhard Euler

I have nominated Leonhard Euler for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Delist" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. (t · c) buidhe 04:04, 8 May 2021 (UTC)

RfC of interest

This RfC may be of interest to members of this group. Beyond My Ken (talk) 04:01, 1 July 2021 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Alchemical literature

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Alchemical literature is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted. The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Alchemical literature. ☿ Apaugasma (talk ☉) 20:55, 17 November 2021 (UTC)

Astrology-related articles being discussed for deletion

Discussions are taking place as to whether the articles Descendant (astrology), Angle (astrology) and Derivative house are suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether they should be deleted. The articles will be discussed at:

In addition, a recent proposal to delete the article Midheaven has been rejected, but any editor is welcome to start a deletion discussion about it. ☿ Apaugasma (talk ☉) 13:35, 18 November 2021 (UTC)

Notification

Galileo Galilei has been nominated for a community good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 15:51, 25 November 2021 (UTC)

Instances of scientific dogma

Is there any list of situations where certain scientific views were marginalized? Like for example Galileo affair. I recently read about the fact that challenging Clovis first theory was "a brutal experience, something that Jacques Cinq-Mars (archeologist) once likened to the Spanish Inquisition." - "Funding for his Bluefish work grew scarce: His fieldwork eventually sputtered and died." [4] - This document talks about scientific dogma - "In retrospect, it seems to me that Clovis-First graduated from a theory to received wisdom and ultimately to a dogma too ardently defended" (After Clovis-First collapsed: reimagining the peopling of the Americas - January 2014 - Project: Maritime Dispersals in Deep Human History - Authors: Jon Erlandson - University of Oregon)

I mean instances when challenging the scientific consensus or the scientific views of authorities was very difficult or impossible. [5]

Another instances is this: "During the eighteenth century the French Academy of Sciences stubbornly denied the evidence for the fall of meteorites" and ""Scientists in other countries were anxious not to be considered as backward compared with their famous colleagues in Paris", writes F. Paneth ("Science and Miracles", Durham University Journal, vol. 10 (1948-9), p. 49). "... many public museums threw away whatever they possessed of these precious meteorites; it happened in Germany, Denmark, Switzerland, Italy and Austria." [6] - this is another example of consensus of the scientific community putting a huge pressure on those who support a new valid idea.

The Alvarez hypothesis started a very fierce debate it seems. [7]

I would like to start a list of such situations - but in my user space for the moment since I don't even have a good common term - "scientific dogma" does not have a definition and it can be seen as a nonsense and I don't have a better term. -- Barecode (talk) 01:50, 26 December 2021 (UTC)

Superseded theories in science covers it. Alexbrn (talk) 11:20, 26 December 2021 (UTC)

That's good to know but I need a list of such theories that were enforced as dogma and theories that sparked heated debates when confronted with better ones. The meteorites situation is not included in that list. -- Barecode (talk) 20:36, 26 December 2021 (UTC)

Enforced as dogma is always subjective: while social processes and politics can be involved, the scientific method itself implies constant reevaluation and correction. Politics also enforced dogmas like the Catholic church (some may have been tenable scientific beliefs of the time). There also are cases of widely politically debated science that even becomes more confirmed over time (like the discovery of DNA supporting evolution or anthropogenic climate change). But maybe other examples would be Mendel's inheritance, plate tectonics (vs continental drift), germ theory of disease... Then of course popular is fringe science that attempts to portray science as dogmatic (relevant may be Free energy suppression conspiracy theory, Association fallacy#Galileo gambit and of course there are articles about altmed and questionable conditions and a tradition of proponent literature). In between are those who are notable for criticizing peer review, make accusations about the lack of academic freedom, etc. —Paleo Neonate – 20:34, 29 December 2021 (UTC)

Rockefeller University edits

WikiProject History of science members are invited to review my request at Talk:Rockefeller University. I'm requesting to turn a list of discoveries into a narrative and add sourcing. I welcome any suggestions to improve the proposed language. I'm an employee of Rockefeller University so I have a conflict of interest. I am happy to answer questions on the article's talk page. Thanks! KFenzRockefeller (talk) 21:19, 18 February 2022 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Protoscience

The article Protoscience has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

This article is just a wordy dictionary definition, it contains no significant encyclopedic material. It has been this way for at least sixteen years, see the talk page discussion on Delete the article. Per our policy on WP:NOTADICTIONARY, it has no business here.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. — Cheers, Steelpillow (Talk) 14:47, 19 February 2022 (UTC)

FA Review: Hippocrates

I have nominated Hippocrates for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Delist" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Caeciliusinhorto (talk) 19:29, 28 February 2022 (UTC)

Cyclol Featured article review

I have nominated Cyclol for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Delist" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 20:54, 8 March 2022 (UTC)

Extreme amounts of insulin for control over mental illness

I 2601:985:480:4B90:8D8E:2B9B:DB16:5F6C (talk) 17:53, 20 March 2022 (UTC)

Macfarlane Burnet Featured article review

I have nominated Macfarlane Burnet for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Delist" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 01:31, 23 March 2022 (UTC)

User script to detect unreliable sources

I have (with the help of others) made a small user script to detect and highlight various links to unreliable sources and predatory journals. Some of you may already be familiar with it, given it is currently the 39th most imported script on Wikipedia. The idea is that it takes something like

John Smith "Article of things" Deprecated.com. Accessed 2020-02-14. (John Smith "[https://www.deprecated.com/article Article of things]" ''Deprecated.com''. Accessed 2020-02-14.)

and turns it into something like

John Smith "Article of things" Deprecated.com. Accessed 2020-02-14.

It will work on a variety of links, including those from {{cite web}}, {{cite journal}} and {{doi}}.

The script is mostly based on WP:RSPSOURCES, WP:NPPSG and WP:CITEWATCH and a good dose of common sense. I'm always expanding coverage and tweaking the script's logic, so general feedback and suggestions to expand coverage to other unreliable sources are always welcomed.

Do note that this is not a script to be mindlessly used, and several caveats apply. Details and instructions are available at User:Headbomb/unreliable. Questions, comments and requests can be made at User talk:Headbomb/unreliable.

- Headbomb {t · c · p · b}

This is a one time notice and can't be unsubscribed from. Delivered by: MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:01, 29 April 2022 (UTC)

Proposed move: Category:Professors of the University of Cambridge to Category:Professors at the University of Cambridge

You are invited to join the discussion at Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2022 May 10 § Category:Professors of the University of Cambridge. I have proposed standardising towards a convention of using at for institutions and of for subjects, in category names of the format "professor(ship)s [at/of] [institution/subject]" and "[sociologists/historians/etc] [at/of] [institution/subject]" (at least within the Cambridge category tree). I am cross-posting this here as it affects categories related to this project, and may set a precedent. We require more input to reach consensus. Charlie A. (talk) 18:09, 11 May 2022 (UTC)

Grade for God's Philosophers

Hi all,

I have been improving this stub https://wiki.alquds.edu/?query=Talk:God%27s_Philosophers.

I believe it is ready for grading.

Thanks a lot!

Barbarianhamish (talk) 12:58, 23 May 2022 (UTC)

Request for comments at Talk:Astrology

There is a RfC about how to word the first sentences of the lead at Talk:Astrology#Request for comments: Lead paragraph which may be of interest to the members of this WikiProject. ☿ Apaugasma (talk ☉) 18:16, 14 June 2022 (UTC)

Thoughts on History of science page

Hello folks - we're having a bit of a discussion about the History of science article - some editors think there should be a section on approaches, summarising very briefly how histories of science have changed over time. It would be good to get some more perspectives on this on Talk:History of science, please! Thanks in advance. Zeromonk (talk) 12:41, 23 June 2022 (UTC)

Adam Becker

There is a current request from Adam Becker to review the criticism of his book to gauge whether it is balanced for a BLP. This was posted at BLPN but is detailed at his article talkpage.[8] Morbidthoughts (talk) 01:09, 27 August 2022 (UTC)

Hanford Site Featured article review

I have nominated Hanford Site for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets the featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Delist" in regards to the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 01:27, 25 September 2022 (UTC)

Nomination of Timeline of governance and policy studies 2020–present for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Timeline of governance and policy studies 2020–present is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Timeline of governance and policy studies 2020–present until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished.

Prototyperspective (talk) 21:16, 28 September 2022 (UTC)

FAR for Alfred Russel Wallace

I have nominated Alfred Russel Wallace for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets the featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Delist" in regards to the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Z1720 (talk) 20:51, 11 September 2022 (UTC)

Featured Article Save Award for Alfred Russel Wallace

There is a Featured Article Save Award nomination at Wikipedia talk:Featured article review/Alfred Russel Wallace/archive1. Please join the discussion to recognize and celebrate editors who helped assure this article would retain its featured status. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 22:51, 8 October 2022 (UTC)

Conflict Thesis

For years now, wikipedia had an article called Conflict thesis, a drerivative of Relationship between religion and science and Christianity and science. The article doesn't contain anything that isn't already in those articles, and seems to exist to frame the subject of those articls in a very particular, non-neutral way. In fact, the only reason the Conflict thesis article seems to exist is for christian apologists (pretty much the only people who even use the term) to reference it in internet disputes.

By all means, the article should be deleted, but some form of consensus needs to be established first. Unfortunately, the article's talk page is dead, and my past attempt to start a dialogue has been dismissed with zero attempt to even entertain what I have to say. Meanwhile, wikipedia is being used by christian apologists to bspread misinformation. 46.97.170.191 (talk) 12:24, 11 January 2023 (UTC)

Based on a quick skim through the article, it seems to me like there are a variety of reliable sources that discuss the history of the "conflict" thesis (even if only to discredit it), so I think that it passes the notability test. If you think that the article is not neutral enough or contains misinformation, then feel free to improve it. — Freoh 13:01, 11 January 2023 (UTC)

My issue is that the term "conflict thesis" is used exclusively to discredit the notion that there's an intrinsic intellectual conflict between religion and science - a notion that is widely held by sciencitst who are quite honestly the only ones actually qualified to pronounce on this question in a meaningful capacity. Even if there is some sort of consensus among historians that the so called "Conflict Thesis" is "discredited", their consensus has zero bearing on the scientific consensus which is actually based on real, tangible evidence. No scientist worth their money will ever describe the blatant conflict between religion and science as a "thesis", a term that is used very similarly to how creationists claim evolusion is "just a theory".

Improving the article is meaningless because the very premise of this article existing is a POV violation. The conflict between science and religion can be described in the other two articles in detail, which also have glaring problems and are embarassingly one-sided: Christianity and science reads like a fluff piece, listing the many christians who contributed to science, while compltely dismissing the many instances of the church actively impeding sciencitif progress in less than a single paragraph, as the reasoning behind the Conflict Thesis. None of the prominent atheist scholars are given the light of day.

My reason for starting this thread IS to try and start some form of conversation on this topic and hopefully get wikipedia contributors to reach some sort of consensus - that's the first step towards improving any article. But as I stated, my last attempt at trying to start a conversation on the article's own talk page about a year ago has been deleted in bad faith. That's why I came here. 46.97.170.100 (talk) 12:07, 12 January 2023 (UTC)

If you have reliable sources that support this perspective, then feel free to expand the article to make it balanced. Your claim that No scientist worth their money will ever describe the blatant conflict between religion and science as a "thesis" seems fairly exceptional to me, so if you include it, you should probably attribute it rather than stating it in wikivoice. If there is content in the article that is unverified, feel free to remove it. The first step towards improving an article is not always starting a conversation; I think it's often best to be bold and make the changes you want to see. Page renaming is more controversial, so if you would like to rename the page to something like Conflict between science and religion, then find sources that support this change and file a move request. — Freoh 13:06, 12 January 2023 (UTC)

Polyvagal theory

There is an ongoing discussion about the Criticism section of Polyvagal Theory. The discussion is here: Talk:Polyvagal theory#Criticism of the criticism. This discussion needs editors who can take the time to read the approximately 10 academic journal articles that have been cited. The issue is whether 95% of the section represents original research on violation of WP:NOR or not. Reading academic articles to confirm the absence of criticism about a topic is a bit challenging, admittedly, which is why I think members of this project might be well-equipped for the task. Ian Oelsner (talk) 22:44, 25 January 2023 (UTC)

Good article reassessment for Atomic theory

Atomic theory has been nominated for a good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. Onegreatjoke (talk) 21:13, 7 February 2023 (UTC)

Project-independent quality assessments

Quality assessments by Wikipedia editors rate articles in terms of completeness, organization, prose quality, sourcing, etc. Most wikiprojects follow the general guidelines at Wikipedia:Content assessment, but some have specialized assessment guidelines. A recent Village pump proposal was approved and has been implemented to add a |class= parameter to {{WikiProject banner shell}}, which can display a general quality assessment for an article, and to let project banner templates "inherit" this assessment.

No action is required if your wikiproject follows the standard assessment approach. Over time, quality assessments will be migrated up to {{WikiProject banner shell}}, and your project banner will automatically "inherit" any changes to the general assessments for the purpose of assigning categories.

However, if your project has decided to "opt out" and follow a non-standard quality assessment approach, all you have to do is modify your wikiproject banner template to pass {{WPBannerMeta}} a new |QUALITY_CRITERIA=custom parameter. If this is done, changes to the general quality assessment will be ignored, and your project-level assessment will be displayed and used to create categories, as at present. Aymatth2 (talk) 14:37, 11 April 2023 (UTC)