Comments:RNA journal submits articles to Wikipedia

From Wikinews, the free news source you can write!
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Back to article

Wikinews commentary.svg

This page is for commentary on the news. If you wish to point out a problem in the article (e.g. factual error, etc), please use its regular collaboration page instead. Comments on this page do not need to adhere to the Neutral Point of View policy. You should sign your comments by adding ~~~~ to the end of your message. Please remain on topic. Though there are very few rules governing what can be said here, civil discussion and polite sparring make our comments pages a fun and friendly place. Please think of this when posting.

Quick hints for new commentators:

  • Use colons to indent a response to someone else's remarks
  • Always sign your comments by putting --~~~~ at the end
  • You can edit a section by using the edit link to the right of the section heading

That's so cool. I hope Wikipedia will understand how to include such detailed and accurate information, and not let it burn up in flame wars over jargon and other minor issues. --77.75.161.35 21:54, 19 December 2008 (UTC)

Don't worry, I'm pretty sure that will happen eventually. Fephisto (talk) 17:09, 20 December 2008 (UTC)
Of course it will burn up, Wikipedia being Wikipedia, and the fact that for every good editor who is interested in building an encyclopaedia there are hundred editors who are more interested in pushing fringe theories or their political POV.

Great idea[edit]

What a great idea. I must admit I didn't understand the article when I went to take a look at it just now, but hopefully most of the terms will be linked to explanatory articles. :) -- Arwel (talk) 08:52, 20 December 2008 (UTC)

Original Research?[edit]

Can someone review this event from the point of view of wikipedia's policy: w:wikipedia:No original research? - w:user:Mikkalai 02:27, 21 December 2008 (UTC)

We expect that most of the Wikipedia and the corresponding RNA Biology articles will be very review-like. The w:SmY article is a good example of this. For those minority of articles that do contain original research we can simply delay the export from User space until the RNA Biology manuscript is published. I think this satisfies w:wikipedia:No original research but feel free to let me know if it doesn't and I'll see what we can do. Also, I'll update the instructions to authors to clarify this issue after the holidays. Thanks for pointing it out. --Ppgardne (talk) 07:57, 26 December 2008 (UTC)

RNA BIOLOGY journal submits articles to Wikipedia[edit]

The headline "RNA journal submits articles to Wikipedia" is very misleading, as confuses two publications, RNA, the journal of the RNA Society, and RNA Biology, which is a second RNA centered journal. The headline should read "RNA BIOLOGY journal submits articles to Wikipedia". —76.241.158.246 15:27, 27 December 2008 (UTC)

I read the headline as "a generic journal about RNA", which I think is what was meant. If it was referring to the journal of the RNA Society, I would expect it to be something like "RNA journal" or "the journal "RNA"". -- Arwel (talk) 16:47, 28 December 2008 (UTC)