2008/12/17 Wily D <wilydoppelganger(a)gmail.com>om>:
On Tue, Dec 16, 2008 at 6:36 PM, Thomas Dalton
<thomas.dalton(a)gmail.com> wrote:
2008/12/16 David Gerard
<dgerard(a)gmail.com>om>:
2008/12/16 Thomas Dalton
<thomas.dalton(a)gmail.com>om>:
Sounds like a fantastic idea. Only problem seems
to be that they
publish the wikipedia articles/summaries before the papers, it needs
to be the other way around so the paper can be a reference for the
summary.
* '''d''', nn, v, auto, spam - ~~~~
Are you serious?
That would be the outcome at AfD, assuming it got there, which would
depend on how trigger happy the C:CSD patrollers that day are.
It's discussed in a peer reviewed journal, that covers verifiability.
I don't see how it's autobiographical, it's about science, not a
person. It's not commercial, so it's not spam. I'm not sure what the
notability guidelines are for science, so I guess it might fail there,
I'd have to look it up.