Open main menu
Wikipedia β

Wikipedia:WikiProject Science

Scope Scope and goalsEdit

This WikiProject aims primarily to coordinate the efforts of Wikipedians interested in science in an effort to improve popular science-related articles. It is motivated by the belief that a good scientific article should be both understandable by the "general public" and interesting to the scientifically inclined. This is important because many popular articles are about science, so contributing to them brings us the satisfaction that it will be appreciated by many.

The goals of this WikiProject are:

  1. To attract Wikipedians to this project and focus the effort for maximum efficiency
  2. To serve as a nexus and discussion area to build consensus on how to write good scientific articles.

Plan of approachEdit

The approach is to start with the most popular scientific articles, then focus on the more specific ones. The most popular scientific articles are the ones that are most referenced by other articles (as Google does).

Other science projectsEdit

Additional science projects are listed at this directory page: WikiProject Council: Directory – Science. See the current Science portal for examples of how science articles can be arranged topically and linked to and from related WikiProjects and Portals. Outline of the scientific method is also a useful article.

Nuvola apps kword.png How you can helpEdit

"All of science is nothing more than the refinement of everyday thinking."

— Albert Einstein, in "Physics and Reality" (1936); later published in Out of My Later Years (1950)

Improve Wikipedia's coverage of science-related topics:

  1. Identify articles related to science and tag talk pages with the project's banner: {{WikiProject Science}}
  2. Improve and discuss the proposed structures of articles
  3. Improve science articles
  4. Sign the guestbook or place {{User WikiProject Science}} on your user page.
  5. Add this page to your watchlist to see what's occurring here

Improve the bird's eye viewEdit

The Outline of science and its branch outline articles are intended to summarize all of the sciences. These are in turn part of Wikipedia's outline system which is one of Wikipedia's main contents systems. Please look it and its branches over and fill-in missing topics. If Wikipedia has an article or article section about those topics, please add links to them.

While analyzing the outlines, please consider (and fix as needed):

  1. What's missing?
  2. Is the structure of the outline (sections and indents) representative of the subject?
  3. Does the outline help convey the relationships between the topics presented in the best way possible?

The overall purpose of the outlines is to help readers comprehend science. The science outline provides a taxonomy of the subject, and also serves as a table of contents and navigation aid to browse Wikipedia's articles (and article sections) about the subject. It is also a useful tool for the WikiProject to analyze, plan and develop science-related material. Outlines are a hub from which to organize scientific topics.

The concept of "reverse outlines" is a very relevant example. Reverse outlines provide a structural model overview, which in addition to being a summary of the work, can reveal gaps in coverage and other weaknesses for revision purposes. Please help improve the Outline of science article, which is this project's bird's eye view.

OtherEdit

Scientists in RedEdit

I have been working on creating "scientists in red", creating links to non-existent articles which I think should be created. I think this needs to made more visible, acquiring the same visibility as the "Women in Red". On occasion, I find that some zealous editor deletes my red contributions when a (very little) research on his/her part would reveal that, indeed, the person is a notable scientist. It would be great to get a scientists in red movement going: it might discourage such mindless edits and get a few more scientists up on the board. MargaretRDonald (talk) 22:22, 12 August 2018 (UTC)


Article alertsEdit

Categories for discussion

Miscellany for deletion

Good article nominees

Requests for comments

StatisticsEdit

Science articles by quality and importance
Quality Importance
Top High Mid Low NA ??? Total
  FA 2 2 1 5
  FL 1 1
  GA 2 1 6 2 11
B 7 11 11 10 9 48
C 9 33 34 62 50 188
Start 2 48 74 324 296 744
Stub 2 22 29 411 89 553
List 5 11 13 40 26 95
Book 7 7
Category 1,982 1,982
Disambig 14 14
File 7 7
Portal 14 14
Project 11 11
Redirect 1 59 60
Template 57 57
Other 4 4
Assessed 29 128 161 856 2,155 472 3,801
Unassessed 2 183 185
Total 29 128 161 858 2,155 655 3,986
WikiWork factors (?) ω = 7,971 Ω = 5.14


CategoriesEdit

Nuvola apps kdmconfig.png MembersEdit

To add your name to the list of members, please visit the Guest book.

Community.png Parentage and related WikiProjectsEdit

Related pagesEdit

Older project pagesEdit

Scientific Peer ReviewEdit

Peer review at this project is no longer active and scientific articles should be directed to the general Wikipedia peer review. Reviews of articles that were completed are archived here.

CommentsEdit

As noted at Talk:Environmental chemistry please do any work in consensus with other editors. Removing large sections leaving bare headings is not the right way to proceed.  Velella  Velella Talk   08:50, 12 June 2013 (UTC)

A refereed journal on WikiversityEdit

I think I posted this on an archived discussion and will look for a better place to post--Guy vandegrift (talk) 09:49, 14 January 2016 (UTC)

 

According to this survey, the prime disincentive against making scholarly contributions to Wikipedia is that it will not advance careers. Wikiversity:First Journal of Science will be a peer-reviewed journal that should alleviate this problem for recent college graduates who are not expected to have published in the established scholarly journals.

The word "First" in the title is intended to suggest that we need more journals like this. The Wikiversity:First Journal of Science was patterned after the Wikiversity Journal of Medicine, but will have a somewhat more informal flavor, consistent with this new journal's intent to focus on teaching at the undergraduate college level. Wikiversity:First Journal of Science will attribute with bylines that list usernames only, in contrast with the use of real names by the Wikiversity Journal of Medicine

Another unique feature of Wikiversity:First Journal of Science is that edited versions of Wikipedia articles are welcome, and are presented as Wikipedia articles on the Wikiversity journal via permalinks to the history of Wikipedia articles. This is currently accomplished in a rather awkward fashion, by moving the Wikipedia article into the editor's user space, and after proper attribution, deleting all that extraneous prose that Wikipedia articles tend to acquire. An example of this shown in one of the three "pseudo-articles" that were used to create a mockup issue. Of the three "pseudo-articles" in this mockup, I consider only one to be suitable for publication. It is Wikipedia's Introduction to quantum mechanics. Note how the logo was inserted into the "pseudo-accepted" version without permission of the article's current editors. In other words, all of Wikipedia's 5 million articles are candidates for publication in this journal, and in a manner of speaking, have already effectively submitted their manuscripts to Wikiversity:First Journal of Science for review--Guy vandegrift (talk) 05:24, 14 January 2016 (UTC)

Collaboration of the Month (inactive)Edit

ToolsEdit

  • reFill – Edits bare url references: adds title, dates, publisher, etc.

Sister projectsEdit

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiProject_Science&oldid=854655379"