Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Maths, science, and technology
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The following discussions are requested to have community-wide attention:
- Talk:Omega Point (Tipler) Are parentheticals such as this appropriate in the HTTP version of a predominantly hyper-reference encyclopedia?
- Talk:Windows Vista 64-bit editions Is Vista 64-bit sufficiently different to get a different article page?
- Talk:Drupal You will notice that Replysixty is eliminating referenced content and vindictively reverting to prior versions. Would like independent evaluation.
- Talk:List of compatible and incompatible programs for Windows Vista 64 Is a Vista 64 bit page reasonable as a separate item from Vista 32?
- Talk:Orgone Do sources support orgone as vitalism and should pseudoscience go in lead?
- Talk:Nylon-eating bacteria Whether to remove, or drastically trim, references to the evolution/creationism controversy from this article on a scientific subject
- Talk:Rebreather Whether the article's External Links section is consistent with Wikipedia Policy
- Talk:Scientific opinion on climate change Is the existence of a properly run poll or survey of qualified scientists relevant for determining whether or not a "consensus" of qualified scientists exist over controversial scientific issues?
- Talk:Rupert Sheldrake can Sheldrake works be considered to be a WP:RS beyond the limited scope of WP:V#Self-published and questionable sources in articles about themselves?
- Talk:Chiropractic I claim that WP:FRINGE applies to this article. Who disagrees/agrees and why?
- Talk:Cross-multiplication Should Cross multiply and Rule of three merge?
- Talk:Taser Should information on "excited delirium" as well as scientific studies on the Taser be included in this article or in the Taser controversy spin-off. Is moving critical information in the Taser article, such as medical studies regarding the device, to the Taser controversy article consistent with NPOV? Is having a separate criticism article or section consistent with NPOV?
- Talk:Hystero-epilepsy Should this Skepdic link be included in the article?
To add a discussion to RFC:
- Add {{RFCsci| section=section name !! reason=a short summary of the discussion !! time= ~~~~~ }}
- Mind the exclamation marks! Do not use pipe symbols to separate the parameters.
- Warning:
!and=will not work anywhere in the template, except for parameter separation.{{and}}might work outside of the time parameter.|works again. - Do not edit the RFC list directly; the bot will invariably undo your edits.
- Report problems to Wikipedia talk:Requests for comments.
