Template:RFCsci list

The following discussions are requested to have community-wide attention:

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?
Talk:Ultra-Mobile PC Should the article refer to the UMPC platform specifically, or inexpensive/small portable computers (e.g. ULPC or subnotebook or ultraportable) in general?

To add a discussion to RFC:

Add {{RFCsci| section=section name !! reason=a short summary of the discussion !! time= ~~~~~ }}
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.

For more information, see User:RFC bot