skip to content »

ingenerius.ru

Xxx danras com

Nothing stops us from using a subject-specific Wikipedia fork as a base to build upon and then writing reviews to supplement (or supplant) particular encyclopedia articles.Actually, I think a site which offers both types of content has a better chance of pleasing everybody and thereby attracting more visitors (some of whom then become contributors themselves, etc.).

I'm considering setting up a new wiki site which would allow the creation and continuous updating of reviews of scientific topics.I hesitate because I expect extreme backlash from pro-cf editors.Commentary on the article and my actions is requested. The crackpots and supporters of the crackpots will inundate you with incomprehensible diatribes and personal attacks.I'm still working on getting server space and a domain name — a student holiday has compressed everyone's schedules and made it harder to discuss with people, but I'm still very hopeful I can snag a spot in the edu domain.Anville , 27 September 2006 (UTC) I like your idea.It looks like it goes about halfway to where I'm after - i.e.

it's continually updated, but as you say it's not collaborative.

Waxigloo , 28 September 2006 (UTC)Anville, I've been too exhausted to respond with appropriate enthusiasm to your proposal, but once I regain some strength :-/ I'll want to hear more.

I think this might be a very good idea, especially if MIT is willing to devote some servers to host an experimental version.

But if you really want to try, then best of luck to you!

Who knows, maybe one day someone will come along with sufficient knowledge and infinite patience to make a reasonable article of it.

This was a featured article, but is no longer that, nor is it a good article as of this July. It seems to me that this degradation is due to a severe pro- cold fusion bias, which I've commented on and have, to some extent, attempted to remove.