![]() | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 | Archive 2 | Archive 3 | Archive 4 | Archive 5 |
several ppl come here, left their question together with their email and they wait from us to send them the answer in their mailbox. I would prefer if they could come back in RD after some hours or days and check for the answer by themselves. Do you think we should write something at the top of RD like "It would be better not to give ur email and come back after a few hours or days to check for answers" ? Optim 17:03, 1 Feb 2004 (UTC)
Since Zap's been moving things around, Reference desk has been moved to Ask Wikipedians... I don't really mind the new name all that much, but we should be all going through consensus decisions first, so you can express views on a possible move to a new name here. Dysprosia 11:27, 24 Feb 2004 (UTC)
I made the 'Post a question' link more prominent at the top of the page, as it was previously easy to skip past it. I think it's slightly more usable this way, but it's easy to change back if anyone disagrees. Chopchopwhitey 03:05, 22 Apr 2004 (UTC)
Do you think it's appropriate for new questions to go to the bottom when actually they need more visibility?
The Guardian has a story comparing Google's speed of retrieving information against other, more traditional, research methods. I thought it'd be fun to see how Wikipedia compared. (Please note was absent in the following)
Jim Regan 21:57, 6 May 2004 (UTC)
I'm wondering if there should be an instruction to people who post questions like "Please check back here for answers in the next couple days" or something. I just happened to notice one question where someone left an e-mail address, and I'm worried he didn't realize that he should check back here for an answer. — siro χ o 15:26, Aug 7, 2004 (UTC)
Well this is probably the single largest page I've seen on WP as of yet. I'm currently on an ISDN line here, and I can tell you it hurts! Is it really necessary to keep entries several week old? Since we have a proper archive, why not set a sharp policy. I propose archiving any question where the latest entry is a minimum of 5 days old. -- Solitude 20:20, 16 Sep 2004 (UTC)
Lots of people come over here asking about how they should cite Wikipedia on their essays and such. So, I suggest we here (and in Help Desk as well) something like the following, somewhere in the top of the page :
But, of course, with some changes for clarification (I'm not particulary good at that myself). I think that would help some of these users. — Kieff | Talk 04:59, Oct 13, 2004 (UTC)
Someone asked on Wikipedia:Requested articles#Social sciences and humanities
The question concerns Science (either Anatomy or Medicine), rather than Social sciences and humanities, and that distinction is worth learning. But there is no answer to the question as you pose it. Anencephaly is a condition that has no doubt been occuring in humans (and proto-humans) throughout our evolution as a species; it must have been independently observed by many midwives and shamans, and probably even independently identified many times as something distinguishable from other
birth defects. Understanding of it in other than magical terms has surely been a process of too many small steps to identify, in general understanding of the world, and eventually in the field of
embryology. WP articles linked in this response, including
cephalic disorder, may be of interest to you.
--
Jerzy
(t) 01:48, 2004 Oct 20 (UTC)
Though there is an interesting article that points out that anencephalics are lacking in the archeological record [2],, and another that points out that one scientist who was instrumental in the (relatively recent) beginnings of teratology and studied and classified anencephalics was Geoffroy Saint-Hilaire [3] . You will find other articles at the PubMed index by searching various other combinations of "anotocephaly" "anencephaly" "teratology" "history" and "paleopathology". -- Nunh-huh 03:29, 23 Oct 2004 (UTC)
How about the old standard: insisting they move out of the house and get a job? Alteripse 19:01, 13 Nov 2004 (UTC)
How could possibly presume to answer without speculating what the questioner has in mind? Good grief! Alteripse 02:01, 14 Nov 2004 (UTC)
![]() | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 | Archive 2 | Archive 3 | Archive 4 | Archive 5 |
several ppl come here, left their question together with their email and they wait from us to send them the answer in their mailbox. I would prefer if they could come back in RD after some hours or days and check for the answer by themselves. Do you think we should write something at the top of RD like "It would be better not to give ur email and come back after a few hours or days to check for answers" ? Optim 17:03, 1 Feb 2004 (UTC)
Since Zap's been moving things around, Reference desk has been moved to Ask Wikipedians... I don't really mind the new name all that much, but we should be all going through consensus decisions first, so you can express views on a possible move to a new name here. Dysprosia 11:27, 24 Feb 2004 (UTC)
I made the 'Post a question' link more prominent at the top of the page, as it was previously easy to skip past it. I think it's slightly more usable this way, but it's easy to change back if anyone disagrees. Chopchopwhitey 03:05, 22 Apr 2004 (UTC)
Do you think it's appropriate for new questions to go to the bottom when actually they need more visibility?
The Guardian has a story comparing Google's speed of retrieving information against other, more traditional, research methods. I thought it'd be fun to see how Wikipedia compared. (Please note was absent in the following)
Jim Regan 21:57, 6 May 2004 (UTC)
I'm wondering if there should be an instruction to people who post questions like "Please check back here for answers in the next couple days" or something. I just happened to notice one question where someone left an e-mail address, and I'm worried he didn't realize that he should check back here for an answer. — siro χ o 15:26, Aug 7, 2004 (UTC)
Well this is probably the single largest page I've seen on WP as of yet. I'm currently on an ISDN line here, and I can tell you it hurts! Is it really necessary to keep entries several week old? Since we have a proper archive, why not set a sharp policy. I propose archiving any question where the latest entry is a minimum of 5 days old. -- Solitude 20:20, 16 Sep 2004 (UTC)
Lots of people come over here asking about how they should cite Wikipedia on their essays and such. So, I suggest we here (and in Help Desk as well) something like the following, somewhere in the top of the page :
But, of course, with some changes for clarification (I'm not particulary good at that myself). I think that would help some of these users. — Kieff | Talk 04:59, Oct 13, 2004 (UTC)
Someone asked on Wikipedia:Requested articles#Social sciences and humanities
The question concerns Science (either Anatomy or Medicine), rather than Social sciences and humanities, and that distinction is worth learning. But there is no answer to the question as you pose it. Anencephaly is a condition that has no doubt been occuring in humans (and proto-humans) throughout our evolution as a species; it must have been independently observed by many midwives and shamans, and probably even independently identified many times as something distinguishable from other
birth defects. Understanding of it in other than magical terms has surely been a process of too many small steps to identify, in general understanding of the world, and eventually in the field of
embryology. WP articles linked in this response, including
cephalic disorder, may be of interest to you.
--
Jerzy
(t) 01:48, 2004 Oct 20 (UTC)
Though there is an interesting article that points out that anencephalics are lacking in the archeological record [2],, and another that points out that one scientist who was instrumental in the (relatively recent) beginnings of teratology and studied and classified anencephalics was Geoffroy Saint-Hilaire [3] . You will find other articles at the PubMed index by searching various other combinations of "anotocephaly" "anencephaly" "teratology" "history" and "paleopathology". -- Nunh-huh 03:29, 23 Oct 2004 (UTC)
How about the old standard: insisting they move out of the house and get a job? Alteripse 19:01, 13 Nov 2004 (UTC)
How could possibly presume to answer without speculating what the questioner has in mind? Good grief! Alteripse 02:01, 14 Nov 2004 (UTC)