The edit can be undone. Please check the comparison below to verify that this is what you want to do, and then publish the changes below to finish undoing the edit.
Latest revision | Your text | ||
Line 10: | Line 10: | ||
== Welcome! == | == Welcome! == | ||
<div style="border:2px solid #fda; padding:8px; margin:1px; background-color:#fffdf9"> | <div style="border:2px solid #fda; padding:8px; margin:1px; background-color:#fffdf9"> | ||
Line 29: | Line 26: | ||
</div> | </div> | ||
Hi! Sounds like you probably don't need the usual tips for newbies, but anyway, welcome...! | |||
Good questions - our policies are still being developed (I'll have a look and see if there's any you haven't seen - but I think [[Appropedia:Rigor]] is the main one. but the bottom line, I think, is that as a community of science-minded people, we require contributions to be consistent with science. There are potential pitfalls in this, of course, and we have other policies that I believe will provide safeguards - openness, allowing opinion (in the appropriate place, and marked as such) and encouraging questions. So there may well be pages on things we believe are pseudoscience - and these should have a rigorous discussion, clearly laying out the arguments for each side. | Good questions - our policies are still being developed (I'll have a look and see if there's any you haven't seen - but I think [[Appropedia:Rigor]] is the main one. but the bottom line, I think, is that as a community of science-minded people, we require contributions to be consistent with science. There are potential pitfalls in this, of course, and we have other policies that I believe will provide safeguards - openness, allowing opinion (in the appropriate place, and marked as such) and encouraging questions. So there may well be pages on things we believe are pseudoscience - and these should have a rigorous discussion, clearly laying out the arguments for each side. |