I have just moved one 'rumour' of a proof off [[Riemann hypothesis]].
I'm not sure quite what the treatment should be - say by analogy with [[cold fusion]]. This is not really a NPOV difficulty, but about encyclopedic nature. I suppose I have tended to duck this sort of issue in the past.
Well, if we have Wikinews, scientific rumours can be news. After some length of time, a rumour of some breakthrough that gets no further support becomes stale and ... well, and what?
Options are
-just to drop rumours after a few months -not to feature them in the first place -create separate 'rumours' pages where there seems to be a need.
I feel the first, if vague, is probably best.. If there was a sound basis in the first place for mentioning it, a rumour can be moved to a talk page when it becomes more apparent that it was optimistically slanted.
Not reporting any unconfirmed stuff looks too rigid to me. If the criterion were publication in a refereed journal, that could take forever, in wikitime.
The trouble with separate pages is that attention-seekers will pick up on them, and self-promoting rumours are the bane of academic life.
Charles
Charles
Charles Matthews said:
Options are
-just to drop rumours after a few months -not to feature them in the first place -create separate 'rumours' pages where there seems to be a need.
In mathematics, ignore rumors. Mathematics cranks are ten-a-penny. If a prominent mathematician (tenured professor, say) says ''he'' has personally seen and checked a proof, that is encyclopedic.