This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Russian Academy of Natural Sciences article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
This article is rated Stub-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
This article was selected as the article for improvement on 20 April 2020 for a period of one week. |
This article was selected as the article for improvement on 6 July 2020 for a period of one week. |
There are missing sources for some of the members:
member of the Russian Academy of Sciences as his wikipage says. maybe some was mixing the two up?
also a member of the Russian Academy of Sciences
not mentioned on his wikipage and he is a honorary member really?
his wikipage even says he is the president of that academy. I actually doubt that, because the presented source just says member. http://www.ted.com/tedx/events/1128
Valery Petrosyan and Gennadiy Onishchenko just no source.
Why does this article have a list of members? Is that a complete list? —BarrelProof (talk) 23:03, 10 July 2013 (UTC)
The problem of mixing up Russian Academy of Sciences and Russian Academy of Natural Sciences should be mentioned on the page. 77.64.141.176 (talk) 17:58, 14 March 2012 (UTC)
As can be seen from the edit history, there seems to be some dispute over the legitimacy of this organization and it's various associations. See here, for example. Please discuss it out and come to a consensus. Anyone who edit wars (specifically warning CloudySunshine, Chengdian, and the various IPs) will be blocked without further notice. ···日本穣 · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe · Join WP Japan! 00:17, 18 December 2020 (UTC)
The version mentioning the criticism should be restored, as it is adequately sourced. For example, the Russian Academy of Sciences website does refer to an article discussion this NGO's indulging in pseudo-science [2], albeit having some form of UN recognition [3]. Significantly, the Russian Wikipedia article on Российская академия естественных наук has an even more extensive criticism section, viz., ru:Российская академия естественных наук#Критика, where additional sources are cited. — JGHowes talk 16:14, 18 December 2020 (UTC)
This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Hi. If an admin has a couple of seconds on their hands, it would be good if "erstwhile" in the lede was replaced by "former". While "erstwhile" does mean "former" it's not necessarily a word many people will understand. I don't promote the "dumbing-down" of English Wikipedia, but I do champion using the word most easily understood by the largest number of people. Of course, this is not a crisis of any kind, I just went to change it myself when I realized that the article was fully protected. Beyond My Ken (talk) 06:02, 21 December 2020 (UTC)