Sciencemadness Discussion Board
Not logged in [Login - Register]
Go To Bottom

Printable Version  
Author: Subject: Breaking Wikipedia's rules.
International Hazard

Posts: 991
Registered: 13-10-2002
Member Is Offline

[*] posted on 1-2-2016 at 07:38
Breaking Wikipedia's rules.

Replicating Wikipedia seems like wasted effort and bandwidth. Accordingly it seems like the best material for the Wiki would be things that can't be put on Wikipedia because it breaks a rule. So which rules should we break and what are the most important ones to concentrate on breaking first?

No original research.
Wikipedia is not an instruction manual.
Neutral point of view?
View user's profile View All Posts By User
Forum Drunkard

Posts: 6033
Registered: 25-3-2014
Member Is Offline

[*] posted on 1-2-2016 at 09:25

We could break Rule #1 and put Actual Scientific material on the SM wiki.

Things like Actual Experiments, Real Results, photos of things We Actually Did etc.

Stuff like that.

Madness is thinking i'm not drunk.
View user's profile View All Posts By User
Super Moderator

Posts: 2316
Registered: 11-1-2014
Location: Austin, TX
Member Is Offline

Mood: Phenolic

[*] posted on 1-2-2016 at 14:54

We already do all three of those:

1. Some pages already cite original research by members, and we are hoping to make it the more permanent home of write-ups from Prepublication.
2. Every page about a chemical compound or element has a section dedicated to instructions on the preparation of it, and there is a whole category of "How-To" pages.
3. By nature, it won't be exactly neutral as the point of it is to present information that is useful specifically to amateur chemists, rather than to the general public.

Come check out the Official Sciencemadness Wiki
Have a particular topic you're really interested in currently? Why not make a page for it? The wiki can always benefit from more contributors.

My (now defunct) YouTube Channel: Texium
My blog: Texium
View user's profile Visit user's homepage View All Posts By User

  Go To Top