this post was submitted on 28 Apr 2024
788 points (98.0% liked)

Science Memes

10988 readers
1865 users here now

Welcome to c/science_memes @ Mander.xyz!

A place for majestic STEMLORD peacocking, as well as memes about the realities of working in a lab.



Rules

  1. Don't throw mud. Behave like an intellectual and remember the human.
  2. Keep it rooted (on topic).
  3. No spam.
  4. Infographics welcome, get schooled.

This is a science community. We use the Dawkins definition of meme.



Research Committee

Other Mander Communities

Science and Research

Biology and Life Sciences

Physical Sciences

Humanities and Social Sciences

Practical and Applied Sciences

Memes

Miscellaneous

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] slazer2au@lemmy.world 114 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago) (2 children)

Oh Wikipedia, please never change.

[–] Liz@midwest.social 29 points 6 months ago (1 children)

Wikipedia can be weird sometimes. I'm trying to get an article approved and every time I re-submit it gets denied for different reasons.

[–] emergencyfood@sh.itjust.works 7 points 6 months ago (1 children)

I've never had to get a new article approved. I just write it. Is it about something very controversial?

[–] Liz@midwest.social 1 points 6 months ago (1 children)

Uh, what? As far I can tell every new draft needs to be approved before switching to the main page.

[–] emergencyfood@sh.itjust.works 4 points 6 months ago (1 children)

This is not standard practice. An article that is controversial or one that has been vandalised a lot may put in place such a policy. But the vast majority of articles on (English) Wikipedia can be freely edited.

[–] Liz@midwest.social 2 points 6 months ago (1 children)

I'm not talking about updating an existing article. I'm taking about publishing an entirely new page. I can and do make corrections and additions to existing articles without review. I wrote a completely new article and every time I submit it for review it comes back with a different reason for rejection. However, the most recent one was actually due to a misunderstanding on my part about acceptable sources (turns out I was being more restrictive than I needed to be), so at least it'll be easy to implement the changes this reviewer wants to see.

[–] emergencyfood@sh.itjust.works 2 points 6 months ago (1 children)

I have never had to submit a new article for review. Are you writing articles on a topic that is controversial?

[–] Liz@midwest.social 2 points 6 months ago (1 children)

Nope! Just some technical stuff. Maybe it's one of of those things where there's not technically an enforcement mechanism. I read all about how to start a draft and turn it into a full article, which includes submitting it for review. Maybe you can just decide not to do that.

[–] emergencyfood@sh.itjust.works 2 points 6 months ago

I'm guessing that's a new guideline then. It wasn't there when I joined. Also I might have been granted autopatrolled at some point, which might be why I get away with it.