Portal talk:Science

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Featured portal The Science Portal is a featured portal, which means it has been identified as one of the best portals on Wikipedia. If you see a way this portal can be updated or improved without compromising previous work, please feel free to contribute.
December 16, 2006 Featured portal candidate Promoted
This talk page is automatically archived by Werdnabot. Any sections older than 60 days are automatically archived to Portal talk:Science/Archive 1. Sections without timestamps are not archived.


[edit] Did you know...?

That the DYK section hasn't been changed in almost a year? Antimatter--talk-- 16:37, 19 November 2007 (UTC)

Did you know that a PRODUCT sold in the market place actually claims to stop Cigarette addiction. It is not a drug of any kind and It apparently works. It uses electro-magnetism in certain ear plugs to cause Neuro-Transmiter changes to increase endorphins in the brain, apparently this decreases the desire to satisfy a nicotine addiction. Apparently it works. I am wondering if neuro-transmitter changes might help with Multiple Sclerosis. —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 16:17, 28 December 2007 (UTC)

DMeyering, feel free to add some DYKs. RichardF (talk) 22:57, 28 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Categorizing scientific discoveries by year?

For some time, Wikipedia has featured categorization of things by year. The ones I have tended to use on articles I have worked with are categories like Category:1914 architecture and Category:1966 establishments. Does it make sense to anyone besides me to have group of categories analogous to these, such as "2006 scientific discoveries" that would be generic enough to include:

  • species discovered/cataloged in that year
  • scientific theories first published
  • celestial bodies discovered
  • chemical compounds discovered that year
  • et cetera

Right now there is a series of categories under Category:Years in science, but something about how it is titled does not seem to fit anything except list articles about years or months in science (or at least no one is using these categories in the way I am suggesting). Any thoughts? — Eoghanacht talk 16:24, 28 December 2007 (UTC)

That definitely sounds like an interesting possibility. I arbitrarily picked two years:
Since "events" is broader than "discoveries," someone would have to decide what qualifies for the narrower category. Then, they would have to justify why "discoveries" are more notable than "inventions" or whatever for adding a new section here. If your primary interest is just to create subcategories for something like "Scientific discoveries by year," that seems fine to me. My main suggestion on that would be to use the existing article sections to define what would be a member of such a category and what would no be included. RichardF (talk) 17:44, 28 December 2007 (UTC)
I have no problem with "events" rather than "discoveries". I also realized that Category:Years in science is a subcategory of Category:Events by year, so maybe the simplest thing is to add articles related to scientific discoveries to the appropriate "YEAR in science" category (or make one if not already created for that year). It would just mean using the existing category system in a different way, rather than creating a whole new breed of year categories with marginal advantages. — Eoghanacht talk 18:46, 28 December 2007 (UTC)
I really don't follow that category, but it certainly seems to be one way it was intended to be used, e.g., Category:2004 disasters. RichardF (talk) 22:55, 28 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Portal interchange

Portal:Current events/Science and technology could use a little Portal help. For example I do not know where to get the Featured science article and Featured technology article for a given month. Further input would be welcome. - RoyBoy 800 03:49, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

That's because they don't exist. Both portals use {{Random portal component}}, which randomly displays content every time the portal is refreshed. For example, see Portal:Science/Featured article. RichardF (talk) 03:59, 21 February 2008 (UTC)
Oh yes, and sci/tech deaths... I need to know about dead people. - RoyBoy 800 03:54, 21 February 2008 (UTC)
I don't know of anyone who is pulling that info, except as it might appear from Portal:Science/News/Wikinews‎. RichardF (talk) 03:59, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] wikis are good place to acquire knowledge.

In a knowledge-driven economy, managing and using information effectively is a critical success factor. There are a few challenges that arise from managing diverse information. The major challenge is archiving information easily and retrieving it quickly. Wiki is often used to create collaborative and power community websites, and is increasingly being installed by businesses to provide affordable and effective Intranets, or for use in Knowledge Management. Wiki is highly effective where group communication and collaboration is needed. Wiki offers a WYSIWG (What You See Is What You Get) editor and there is no elaborate syntax or programming involved, which is a boon for professionals who are not very familiar with. It encourages daily updates to the knowledge repository. People are motivated to use it because they are quite familiar with the format and so there is literally no training to invest in. The wikis are easy to edit, they carry an inherent potential to change how we construct knowledge repositories on the Web. Wikis allow groups to form around specific topics Because they are so easy to use, the technology recedes into the background, allowing anyone to become a publisher. Because wikis grow and evolve as a direct result of people adding material to the site, they can address a variety of pedagogical needs—employee involvement, group activities, and so on. —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 13:11, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

Very insightful. But what does it have to do with the science portal? Remember, this page is to discuss science portal-related topics. Please reserve those narratives for the Community portal or Village pump or something else. Antimatter--talk-- 18:59, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Vandalism

I don't think that "February 8: The first commercial vessel to use a kite to help save fuel created by SkySails finished its maiden voyage. Estimates are that the ship saved 10-15% fuel while the kite was in use, which translates into $5,555,555,555,555 to $8,888,888,888,888,888 in CONDOME costs FOR SEX SEX SEX per day.(Nature)" is really true, or grammatically correct... bad spelling. I cant find the right version to revert to. If somebody can find the correct version, please revert it. (I didn't know somebody could misspell "condom", hah) Cyborg999 05:58, 5 June 2008 (UTC)