Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Science

Archives

This page has archives. Sections older than 90 days may be automatically archived by .

Question, looking for help/collaborators

Hello everyone,

I'm Ábel Elekes, a Hungarian postdoc at BarabásiLab,, the research group led by Albert-László Barabási, at Northeastern University in Boston.

Our team is currently studying how scientists are represented in various information sources like Wikipedia and AI systems, focusing on biases related to gender and region.

To show how we can overcome these representation biases, we've designed an intervention study, in which we're adding 100 notable scientists to different information sources, including Wikipedia. These are highly prestigious scientists who, surprisingly, don't currently have Wikipedia pages, but should have based on their significant contributions to their fields.

We're using a web-search based AI to write the articles, but we're having trouble getting them approved by Wikipedia editors, although we feel like they are of high quality.

We're new to Wikipedia editing and could use some help. If anyone here is interested in collaborating on this project, we'd really appreciate your assistance.

Thank you! Ábel Elekesabel (talk) 20:29, 31 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Elekesabel: much caution is needed if you're using AI to write articles; please read Wikipedia:Large language models. You've already been pointed to WP:NACADEMIC. Some of the criteria there are rather subjective, I'd suggest you stick to scientists that meet the more objective critera. Clayton R. Paul was a fellow of the IEEE, which is specifically mentioned in NACADEMIC point 3 as highly selective honor that merits an article for the honoree. It may also be best to stick with people who are deceased; many notable academics don't have much of a biography written about them in their lifetimes, but an obituary can provide an over-view of their life.

Draft:Clayton R. Paul is not written in an encyclopedic style. Please read Wikipedia:Manual_of_Style/Words_to_watch#Puffery. Rather than relying on facts alone (i.e. IEEE fellowship), the article is using opinionated adjectives to assert his importance. "a testament to his exceptional impact on the field", and "contributions have left a lasting mark" are phrases that aren't keeping with an encyclopedic style. Plantdrew (talk) 21:53, 31 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move at Talk:Subjectivity and objectivity (philosophy)#Requested move 7 December 2024

There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Subjectivity and objectivity (philosophy)#Requested move 7 December 2024 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. Reading Beans, Duke of Rivia 07:00, 15 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

"Predictive analytics"

In 2022 [1] and in 2023 [2] this article was converted from a general article to a business article, by WikiEd supported courses in business. This distorts the topic coverage and what this topic is about. It isn't just a business AI topic... as can be seen from remnants of the old article that covers areas that are neither AI nor business topics -- 65.92.246.77 (talk) 21:17, 18 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Good article reassessment for Massachusetts Institute of Technology

Massachusetts Institute of Technology has been nominated for a good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. Z1720 (talk) 16:41, 3 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed changes to Template:Infobox academic

There is a proposal to reorganize Template:Infobox academic. Please feel free to participate in the discussion here. Thanks! — hike395 (talk) 05:31, 27 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Concerns about articles covering Greek letters

I have some concerns about the 24 Wikipedia articles about the Greek letters, along with some related pages. I'm not quite sure where best to post this so I'm starting here.

My initial concerns related to the paucity of references. I'm not sure which one I looked at first but, for example, look at Gamma. You will see 31 examples of how the lowercase and uppercase letters are used as symbols in mathematics and science. Very few of them have references (especially before I added seven references recently). While all are wiki-linked in this article that's not always the case. The link will bring you to more information but it doesn't necessarily provide clear evidence for the assertion.

At a minimum, my hope is to enlist some volunteers to provide references for each of the statements and correct them or remove them if there are errors.

However, as I looked at more articles, I ran across additional concerns related to the overall structure of these articles.

At a high level, there is a consistency of structure among these 24 articles.

Here is my crude summary:

This table does portray a large degree of consistency, but it masks, especially in the case of "body", some differences worth discussing.

	Alpha	Beta	Gamma	Delta	Epsilon	Zeta	Eta	Theta	Iota	Kappa	Lambda	Mu	Nu	Xi	Omicron	Pi
Short description	TRUE	TRUE	TRUE	TRUE	TRUE	TRUE	TRUE	TRUE	TRUE	TRUE	TRUE	TRUE	TRUE	TRUE	TRUE	TRUE
Hatnotes	TRUE	TRUE	TRUE	TRUE	TRUE	TRUE	TRUE	TRUE	TRUE	TRUE	TRUE	TRUE	TRUE	TRUE	TRUE	TRUE
Greek Alphabet sidebar	TRUE	TRUE	TRUE	TRUE	TRUE	TRUE	TRUE	TRUE	TRUE	TRUE	TRUE	TRUE	TRUE	TRUE	TRUE	TRUE
Lead	TRUE	TRUE	TRUE	TRUE	TRUE	TRUE	TRUE	TRUE	TRUE	TRUE	TRUE	TRUE	TRUE	TRUE	TRUE	TRUE
Pronunciation	FALSE	FALSE	FALSE	TRUE	TRUE	FALSE	TRUE	TRUE	TRUE	TRUE	FALSE	TRUE	TRUE	TRUE	TRUE	TRUE
Body	TRUE	TRUE	TRUE	TRUE	TRUE	TRUE	TRUE	TRUE	TRUE	TRUE	TRUE	TRUE	TRUE	TRUE	TRUE	TRUE
Unicode	TRUE	TRUE	TRUE	TRUE	TRUE	TRUE	TRUE	TRUE	TRUE	TRUE	TRUE	TRUE	TRUE	TRUE	TRUE	TRUE
Notes	TRUE	FALSE	FALSE	FALSE	FALSE	FALSE	FALSE	TRUE	FALSE	FALSE	FALSE	FALSE	FALSE	FALSE	TRUE	FALSE
See also	FALSE	FALSE	TRUE	TRUE	TRUE	TRUE	TRUE	TRUE	TRUE	TRUE	TRUE	TRUE	TRUE	FALSE	FALSE	TRUE
References	TRUE	TRUE	TRUE	TRUE	TRUE	TRUE	TRUE	TRUE	TRUE	TRUE	TRUE	TRUE	TRUE	TRUE	TRUE	TRUE
Link to Wiktionary	TRUE	TRUE	TRUE	TRUE	TRUE	TRUE	TRUE	TRUE	TRUE	TRUE	TRUE	TRUE	TRUE	TRUE	TRUE	TRUE
Further reading	FALSE	FALSE	FALSE	FALSE	TRUE	FALSE	FALSE	FALSE	FALSE	FALSE	FALSE	FALSE	FALSE	FALSE	FALSE	FALSE
Categories	TRUE	TRUE	TRUE	TRUE	TRUE	TRUE	TRUE	TRUE	TRUE	TRUE	TRUE	TRUE	TRUE	TRUE	TRUE	TRUE

As an aside, I asked ChatGBT to summarize the layouts. Some might find it interesting but I won't rely on the summary for any further points.

ChatGBT summary of greek article layouts

Prompt

Create a summary of the layouts of the 24 Wikipedia articles about Greek letters

Results

Sure! Here's a summary of the layout of the 24 Wikipedia articles about Greek letters, focusing on their general structure and content:

1. Introduction

Overview of Greek letters: Most articles begin with a brief introduction, covering the letter's position in the Greek alphabet, its origin, and its use in ancient and modern contexts.

Phonetic properties: Some articles mention the phonetic sound or value of the letter in the Greek language.

2. Etymology/History

Origins: A section detailing the historical origins of the letter, often tracing its evolution from Phoenician or other ancient scripts.

Use in Ancient Greek: Some articles discuss the letter's role in Classical Greek, including any variations or changes over time.

3. Character and Appearance

Symbol: A visual representation of the letter in both uppercase and lowercase forms is often included.

Typography: Some articles may detail the typographical variations or fonts in which the letter is used, especially in printed materials or digital texts.

4. Pronunciation

Sound and phonetics: Explanation of the letter's phonetic value in the Greek language. This can also include how the letter is pronounced in modern Greek versus Ancient Greek.

IPA (International Phonetic Alphabet): For phonetic accuracy, some articles include IPA symbols or references.

5. Mathematical and Scientific Uses

Mathematical/Scientific Symbols: Many articles dedicate a section to how the letter is used as a symbol in mathematics, physics, engineering, etc. For example, Alpha (a) is used for angles, Beta (ß) for beta particles, and Gamma (?) for gamma rays.

Greek letters in formulas: Some articles feature common formulas or equations where the letter appears.

6. Cultural and Linguistic Significance

Common Expressions: Greek letters often have symbolic meanings in various fields. Articles may mention their use in popular phrases, idioms, or expressions.

Significance in Greek culture: Some articles may discuss the letter’s cultural importance or its role in philosophy, literature, and Greek mythology.

7. Modern Usage

Contemporary Roles: Includes how the letter is used in modern Greek as well as in other contexts like academia, technology, or branding.

Transliteration: Some articles will discuss the transliteration of the letter into the Latin alphabet for use in non-Greek languages.

8. See Also / Related Articles

Links to related letters: Articles often feature links to other Greek letters or related topics, such as the Greek alphabet, modern Greek, or historical uses of the letters.

9. References and Further Reading

Citations: Most articles conclude with references to scholarly texts or sources, and sometimes include links for further exploration.

This general layout applies to most of the articles about individual Greek letters. Some articles may also feature additional sections depending on the unique aspects of the letter, but this structure remains common across the 24 entries.

Let's start with some simple observations.

All articles have a link to wiktionary, although not all use the same template. Easily fixed

While all articles have references only a few have a notes section. This may be warranted.

Some articles have a see also section some not. Is this warranted?

All articles have a parenthetical pronunciation guide in the beginning of the lead. Some articles go on to discuss pronunciation in more detail in the lead some do not. Some articles have a standalone section about pronunciation with a variety of section headings (pronunciation, sound value, Names,Greek/Latin/Cyrillic/IPA). I think this deserves rationalization.

One article has a further reading section. Is that specific to that letter or doe it deserve to be in all articles?

Some articles have a specific section on history others do not or include that type of information as part of the lead. What's best?

As mentioned earlier, my bigger concern is the handling of "uses" of the letters which is typically a section in the body. This section goes by various names (Uses, Mathematics and science, Uppercase/Lowercase, Symbol and I think others) In addition, some articles have a separate section for uppercase versus lowercase, some mention B for lowercase,e rs the revers,e and some cover both uppercase and lowercase at the same time. This begs for a standard approach.

Going beyond the articles about the 24 letters (I'm deliberately ignoring for the present the archaic local variants and the treatment of diacritics), there are at least two other articles worth noting.

Greek alphabet

Greek letters used in mathematics, science, and engineering

I have no issues with the first of these two articles although I haven't looked at it closely. While there is some redundancy I'm firmly in favor having subjects handled at a high level and separately in more detail. The second article is more of an issue. In some sense it's a summary of the "uses" sections in each of the individual articles, with a curious distinction that it covers only certain fields while the individual articles cover more fields of study. That's worth discussing but more importantly, the use is related to mathematics science and engineering are not always identical between the summary article in the individual articles. We should discuss what if anything should be done. S Philbrick (Talk) 15:51, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]