447
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 25:
Line 25: + + + + + + +
Debate:Who feels that scientific related articles should only reference published research papers instead of websites when dealing with research instead of application? (view source)
Revision as of 13:45, April 23, 2007
, 13:45, April 23, 2007no edit summary
: I can understand that, application is where other sources could be cited for the layman. Pubmed and other science journals are pretty easy to use and link to. Personaly I see this as a way of making sure that people will only edit what they have taken the time out to understand.--[[User:Tims|TimS]] 09:42, 23 April 2007 (EDT)
: I can understand that, application is where other sources could be cited for the layman. Pubmed and other science journals are pretty easy to use and link to. Personaly I see this as a way of making sure that people will only edit what they have taken the time out to understand.--[[User:Tims|TimS]] 09:42, 23 April 2007 (EDT)
Yes, articles from science journals should be included as often as possible, I agree.
I also propose a rule that in the case of quotes, demands a link to a text in which the entire quote and its original context are included, to avoid quote mining or misinterpretations.
[[User:Middle Man|Middle Man]]
== No ==
== No ==