Difference between revisions of "Talk:Scientific establishment"

From Conservapedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search
(→‎Link to essay: What's wrong with putting it in this article?)
Line 3: Line 3:
 
:The essay explains and exposes the lies and distortions of Big Science. Such insight is important to students seeking to make sense of the 'scientific establishment'.  [[User:Bugler|Bugler]] 09:12, 18 October 2008 (EDT)
 
:The essay explains and exposes the lies and distortions of Big Science. Such insight is important to students seeking to make sense of the 'scientific establishment'.  [[User:Bugler|Bugler]] 09:12, 18 October 2008 (EDT)
 
:: But that information, if factual, should go in this article, making a link to an essay unneccesary.  [[User:Philip J. Rayment|Philip J. Rayment]] 09:20, 18 October 2008 (EDT)
 
:: But that information, if factual, should go in this article, making a link to an essay unneccesary.  [[User:Philip J. Rayment|Philip J. Rayment]] 09:20, 18 October 2008 (EDT)
 +
''<throws hands up in despair>'' But it was you who wanted it turned into an essay in the first place! [[User:Bugler|Bugler]] 09:29, 18 October 2008 (EDT)

Revision as of 13:29, October 18, 2008

Link to essay

I don't believe that it's appropriate for an article to link to an essay, especially where the link is merely on an alternative term for the article that it's in (i.e. big science is a term for scientific establishment, so why have a link in the scientific establishment article to elsewhere?). Philip J. Rayment 09:08, 18 October 2008 (EDT)

The essay explains and exposes the lies and distortions of Big Science. Such insight is important to students seeking to make sense of the 'scientific establishment'. Bugler 09:12, 18 October 2008 (EDT)
But that information, if factual, should go in this article, making a link to an essay unneccesary. Philip J. Rayment 09:20, 18 October 2008 (EDT)

<throws hands up in despair> But it was you who wanted it turned into an essay in the first place! Bugler 09:29, 18 October 2008 (EDT)