5,580
edits
Changes
Talk:Essay:Big science (view source)
Revision as of 19:04, September 18, 2008
, 19:04, September 18, 2008→Mention of Conservapedia: new section
:: I would support moving this to Essay (definitely better than deleting it). On a side note, in the general case, I don't think we should let the main-stream media and others dictate term definitions for us. --[[User:DRamon|DRamon]] 12:15, 18 September 2008 (EDT)
:: I would support moving this to Essay (definitely better than deleting it). On a side note, in the general case, I don't think we should let the main-stream media and others dictate term definitions for us. --[[User:DRamon|DRamon]] 12:15, 18 September 2008 (EDT)
:::There are two problems: (1) I don't think Britannica is part of the MSM and (2) the term "big science" (and anything with "big" used to denote "evil capitalist" e.g. big oil, big pharma) was ''invented'' by the MSM. [[User:HelpJazz|Help]][[User talk:HelpJazz|Jazz]] 12:21, 18 September 2008 (EDT)
:::There are two problems: (1) I don't think Britannica is part of the MSM and (2) the term "big science" (and anything with "big" used to denote "evil capitalist" e.g. big oil, big pharma) was ''invented'' by the MSM. [[User:HelpJazz|Help]][[User talk:HelpJazz|Jazz]] 12:21, 18 September 2008 (EDT)
== Mention of Conservapedia ==
A mention of Conservapedia is way over the top. This is an encyclopedia, not a press release. Also, the statement itself didn't mediate the rest of the article, it attempted to confirm the article's conclusions. [[User:HelpJazz|Help]][[User talk:HelpJazz|Jazz]] 15:04, 18 September 2008 (EDT)