Search results
Appearance
The page "Wikipedia talk:Scientific peer review/include/js/speech.js" does not exist. You can click on "Wikipedia talk:Scientific peer review/include/js/speech.js" to create the page directly, or you may request that it be created, but consider checking the search results below to see whether the topic is already covered.
- peer review and the use of peer-reviewed sources. There are multiple problems with peer review, however. Most notably there is a lack of scientific evidence...354 KB (55,638 words) - 05:46, 5 April 2022
- Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Mathematics/Archive/2012/Jun (section List of scientific constants named after people)remove references to Christian's discredited work (not published in any peer-reviewed journa, and shown o be fundamentally flawed by a long list of authorities...86 KB (12,248 words) - 07:25, 4 August 2023
- Wikipedia talk:Identifying reliable sources (medicine)/Archive 5 (section The value of peer-reviewed studies reflecting developments since the last review is greatly overlooked.)the scientific studies themselves, they often provide helpful overviews of evidence's quality. Case reports, whether in the popular press or a peer reviewed...329 KB (47,135 words) - 18:44, 3 March 2023
- UMD sites are more like edited books that a peer-reviewed journal. Neither are "major medical/scientific bodies" as we usually consider them. Not great...149 KB (18,167 words) - 11:32, 22 March 2023
- in agreement, there is often little to say. Actually this is how scientific peer review also works. If the reviewer says nice paper (article), no comments...203 KB (29,822 words) - 15:49, 10 March 2023
- quality) which have been given a pretty badge (and a rather more thorough peer review). --kingboyk 13:53, 16 September 2006 (UTC) I'm suggesting making the...125 KB (19,684 words) - 14:46, 4 February 2023
- hoping we can have here. As GAs and FAs are some what peer reviewed to keep them sort of peer reviewed requires a system like PC. Now as not everyone is convinced...270 KB (33,035 words) - 15:38, 30 May 2022
- Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Plants/Archive73 (section Need a review of my article Dodonaea procumbens by May 31st, please!)etymology are being used in English-language speech and texts. It's fine to create redirects from the scientific name of subspecies and varieties. Plantdrew...250 KB (32,621 words) - 01:29, 7 February 2022
- Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Latter Day Saint movement/Sources (section other possible sources to include)and Sunstone with a more journalistic style. I know that Dialogue has peer review for its articles. I usually try to evaluate articles on a case-by-case...107 KB (14,045 words) - 15:41, 2 July 2024
- American Speech-Language-Hearing Association Journal of the American Medical Association Annual Reviews (publisher) (51 journals, all review articles)...74 KB (9,305 words) - 18:21, 16 July 2024
- Wikipedia talk:Reliable sources/Archive 21 (section scholarship --> double-blind reviewing / anonymous submission)peer reviewed journals are highly reliable. There is no need to go further by saying that "this form of peer review is better than that form of peer review"...259 KB (39,371 words) - 20:48, 2 March 2023
- (talk) 17:57, 14 October 2011 (UTC) I've gone through and completed the peer review, but I want to run the article by MED before the FA trial! My first FA...252 KB (34,928 words) - 13:23, 28 January 2023
- collection" includes videos in a range of subject areas, including news programs (like 60 minutes) and newsreels, music and theatre, speeches and lectures...213 KB (27,236 words) - 15:41, 21 April 2023
- the talk page of the article. WHY? We are suppose to be somewhat of a peer review process along with the GA classification process. So would the reviewers...566 KB (91,668 words) - 06:43, 30 January 2023
- have an idea of the sheer size of the peer-reviewed scientific literature? I think the current rate of peer reviewed articles coming out every day greatly...170 KB (24,681 words) - 02:22, 16 December 2023
- Wikipedia talk:Featured article candidates/archive41 (section Peer review vs. FAC Signpost Dispatch needed)image review needs to be more rigorous at the peer-review stage (just as the prose review does). Some people, in any case, don't get peer reviews, they're...262 KB (36,945 words) - 19:34, 18 February 2023
- arbitrary to people submitting articles. Perhaps we could set up a formal peer review process for reviewers? Assuming the list of participants is up to date...294 KB (38,389 words) - 10:22, 2 April 2023
- Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Medicine/Archive 22 (section Andrew Wakefield, retraction of articles, and worth of "review articles")the scientific studies themselves, they often provide helpful overviews of evidence quality. Case reports, whether in the popular press or a peer-reviewed...251 KB (31,431 words) - 09:54, 21 March 2023
- of MEDRS, please don't forget statements by major medical/scientific bodies, which includes regulatory authorities. in the case of the cell therapy that...150 KB (19,413 words) - 11:40, 26 March 2023
- Science, scientific journals have never published a peer-reviewed article denying the anthropogenic global warming theory. Articles could also include statements...203 KB (31,303 words) - 23:04, 15 December 2023