Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
A research proposal is a document proposing a research project, generally in the sciences or academia, and generally constitutes a request for sponsorship of that research. [1] Proposals are evaluated on the cost and potential impact of the proposed research, and on the soundness of the proposed plan for carrying it out. [2] Research proposals ...
(The current list of proposed usability improvements includes 9 separate proposals concerning the text editor and the editing process, so this issue is not unknown in the Wikipedia community.) [1] There may be many people out there who would like to contribute but can't, perhaps especially women – Wikipedia is dominated by male editors.
Wikipedia:No original research/Wikipedia:Verifiability – Wikipedia is not the place to publish new, original research or find research which has not yet been recognized by credible sources; Wikipedia:Patent nonsense – At any given time, a Wikipedia article may contain nonsense.
Essays, proposals and information pages should only be cited as opinions or advice, not admonishment. They should not be used as an end-run around the Wikipedia process of establishing consensus . It is not a good idea to quote essays— including this one —as though they are Wikipedia-approved policies or guidelines .
Weakness is a symptom of many different medical conditions. [1] The causes are many and can be divided into conditions that have true or perceived muscle weakness. True muscle weakness is a primary symptom of a variety of skeletal muscle diseases, including muscular dystrophy and inflammatory myopathy .
Wikipedia has been the center of a much heated and critical debate in academia pertaining to the relevance, accuracy, and effectiveness of using information found online in academic research, especially in places where information is constantly being created, revised, and deleted by people of various backgrounds, ranging from experts to curious learners.
Proposal: Academic verified page subset – solutions to the problem of verified information via institutional sources. In its short history, wikipedia expanded into on of the premier sources of knowledge on perhaps the widest amount of topics. It stands today as the largest encyclopedic source at any time in history.
The sister essay seems to assume that Wikipedia success is quantitative rather than qualitative. Wikipedia success is defined, not by the quantity of the articles, but by the quantity of high-quality articles. As an example, they cite an "independent test". To demonstrate the above point, we return to the "landfill" analogy.