Main Page: Difference between revisions
No edit summary |
|||
Line 33: | Line 33: | ||
* See my [https://www.science20.com/robert_walker/alice_in_wonderland_sanctioning_in_wikipedia_blocked_for_covering_nasas_science_goal_to_search_for_habitats_for Alice In Wonderland Sanctioning In Wikipedia - Blocked For Covering NASA's Science Goal To Search For Habitats For Life On Mars‽] |
* See my [https://www.science20.com/robert_walker/alice_in_wonderland_sanctioning_in_wikipedia_blocked_for_covering_nasas_science_goal_to_search_for_habitats_for Alice In Wonderland Sanctioning In Wikipedia - Blocked For Covering NASA's Science Goal To Search For Habitats For Life On Mars‽] |
||
So, the idea was to set up a wiki where if you contribute a good astrobiology article it is safe from being arbitrarily deleted by people who know nothing about the topic. If you've wanted to make encyclopedic articles about astrobiology but find Wikipedia frustrating as an editor, this may be useful. |
So, the idea was to set up a wiki where if you contribute a good astrobiology article it is safe from being arbitrarily deleted by people who know nothing about the topic. If you've wanted to make encyclopedic articles about astrobiology but find Wikipedia frustrating as an editor, this may be useful. |
||
With that background in mind: |
|||
* Will proceed more like scholarpedia where if someone contributes a good and substantial article, then they need to approve significant changes, rather than the way Wikipedia does it where anyone can dive in and remove most of the content or rewrite an article or even delete it without talking things over properly. |
|||
* Will proceed more like scholarpedia where if someone contributes a good and substantial article, then they are treated as the main author and need to approve significant changes. |
|||
⚫ | |||
⚫ | |||
* I don't think the voting method for Wikipedia works well with no overall vision. |
|||
I'm admin and will be final authority if needed. Hopefully will be a friendly place :). Also on things like how to categorize pages, on what is and is not included etc. |
|||
Otherwise similar to wikipedia - mainspace articles to be reasonably encyclopaedic, please keep to well sourced statements. |
Otherwise similar to wikipedia - mainspace articles to be reasonably encyclopaedic, please keep to well sourced statements. |
Revision as of 14:46, 6 September 2018
- Select [►] to view subcategories (note work in progress, needs re-organization)
Some of the main pages are:
Astrobiology
- Astrobiology
- Abiogenesis - about natural process of how life arises from non living matter
- Panspermia - transfer of life between plaents on meteorites.
- Terrestrial analogue sites
- Murchison meteorite
Life on Mars
- Possible Present Day Habitats For Life On Mars
- Life on Mars
- Present day Mars habitability analogue environments on Earth
- Viking program
- Allan Hills 84001 - the meteorite with tiney structures resembling cells
Life in other locations
Planetary protection
Blogs
I've also set up a test blog, where one can post opinion pieces, controversial material, whatever one wants related to astrobiology:
Guidelines
- I set this up after a bizarre situation in Wikipedia where the original for Possible Present Day Habitats For Life On Mars was deleted by editors who knew almost nothing about the topic and didn't even know about NASA's objective B of their first science goal.
- See my Alice In Wonderland Sanctioning In Wikipedia - Blocked For Covering NASA's Science Goal To Search For Habitats For Life On Mars‽
So, the idea was to set up a wiki where if you contribute a good astrobiology article it is safe from being arbitrarily deleted by people who know nothing about the topic. If you've wanted to make encyclopedic articles about astrobiology but find Wikipedia frustrating as an editor, this may be useful.
With that background in mind:
- Will proceed more like scholarpedia where if someone contributes a good and substantial article, then they are treated as the main author and need to approve significant changes.
- Similar also for collaborative articles. It's only me editing at present. But anyone can in join in working on it. Please respect existing content and and other authors.
- I don't think the voting method for Wikipedia works well with no overall vision.
I'm admin and will be final authority if needed. Hopefully will be a friendly place :). Also on things like how to categorize pages, on what is and is not included etc.
Otherwise similar to wikipedia - mainspace articles to be reasonably encyclopaedic, please keep to well sourced statements.
Blogs can be original research or opinions and points of views. Can put in your own user space and link to your blog from the main page.
Robertinventor (talk) 00:53, 30 August 2018 (UTC)