Maurreen/Sandbox

=Biology and related=

Richard Sternberg. Is intelligent design creationism, well creationism 19:48, 19 August 2005 (UTC)

*Sexual characteristics - to redirect to sex or not to redirect See also talk page.

, or is it pushing Scientific POV to argue that Creation science is pseudoscience as a matter of fact 23:13, 8 August 2005 (UTC)

.)

Appropriateness of repeatedly describing an alleged IQ discrepancy s effects exclusively in racial terms (cause may errantly be assumed). Dispute over whether the article and subject need to disassociate cause and effect to a much greater degree in order to present the subject neutrally.

*Devolution (biology) was very POV, original research, added to VfD, the discussion needs more input from people that know about evolution and/or creationism.

NPOV complaint registering. The difficulty for the naturalist explanation of the origin of life is not even mentioned nor is the theism view presented. Why not Is theism a fringe opinion Is materialism a fact or does a materialistic view of the origin of life have strong proof in this forensic science question of the origin of life. Are theology departments held to be legitimate departments in academia Are singularity events the exclusive property of materialism Are singularity events repeatable though experiments

, and in extension, should Scientology doctrine be presented in the article 17:01, July 26, 2005 (UTC)

) - wording of the introduction. Several reverts now and disengagement, including a revert after apparently constructive discussion, and an explicit request not to revert. It doesn t seem like any progress will be made without further input. 14:20, July 22, 2005 (UTC)

- Are critical views adequately covered and fairly represented in this article 21:34, 14 July 2005 (UTC):12, 20 Jun 2005 (UTC)

=Math and numbers=

. There are only about 10 active participants and hardly any from metric regions. Please help us solve the problem of editors removing metric units. 12:29, 30 July 2005 (UTC)

=Natural science=

*Hubbert peak theory - One editor seems more than willing to go against consensus, and at the same time not cite any sources. More input is needed. - 20:09, August 30, 2005 (UTC)

Seeking consensus to move the article because its scope exceeds the ideas of a single person. 18:41, 1 September 2005 (UTC)

*Hubbertism (currently consensus delete on VFD) Contains: a decreasing supply of oil will cause modern industrial agriculture to collapse, leading to a drastic decline in food production, food shortages and possibly even mass starvation. as an unsourced foreshadowing of doom. suggest move to religion. 18:15, 31 August 2005 (UTC)

- Should the basis of the big bang hypothesis (and the assumptions that it makes, and the religious (and therefore creationist) nature of its creators) be noted, or should that information be ommitted and the big bang hypothesis stated to be a proven truth July 23, 2005

=Telecommunications and digital technology=

- on how Hong Kong should be displayed. 09:17, August 30, 2005 (UTC)

13:37, 29 August 2005 (UTC)

, linkspamming, originally by the owner of the site, now by his brand new (ie first contribs) 5 friends .

with no consensus. Many think the subject is non-notable and/or unverifiable, but request outside opinions so that it s not just an echo chamber in here. 20:04:23, 2005-08-25 (UTC)

) compatible with Wikipedia s licensing Concerns that this document is simply a huge collection of external links. 15:15:45, 2005-08-20 (UTC)

seem to be developing into a debate between rival companies on whose software is better - could we have a few people check the accuracy of both pages (and indeed, how notable the relevant items of software are) 16:46, 13 August 2005 (UTC)

Dispute is resolved. No need for RFC. -- 15:20, 14 August 2005 (UTC)

compliant. If they can t keep the article neutral, it should be removed completely. Also -- Debate over which websites should go in the external links section. 14:27, 9 August 2005 (UTC)

**Isn t this completely against RFC procedure Personal attacks and arguments in RFC 18:30, 13 August 2005 (UTC)

11:36:34, 2005-08-09 (UTC)

06:28, 9 August 2005 (UTC)

— Sveasoft is a company which publishes third-party firmware for Linksys wireless routers. Both of the company s employees have recently been editing the article, removing factual information which presents their company in a negative light. They are also removing a link to an unaffiliated download site, claiming that it is illegal , even though their firmware is licensed under the GPL. 19:51, August 2, 2005 (UTC)

=Technology and engineering=

- how should technical specifications be presented in articles about aircraft 09:45, 17 July 2005 (UTC)

) - Is the M in the acronym maser commonly accepted in the scientific community as standing for molecular instead of microwave . -- 06:37, 22 July 2005 (UTC)

- Sorry, tried a Help Desk question and a Clean up tag... lacking in Wikiexperience. I would like to improve the navigation and structure of Manufacturing, especially in relation to Industry and Business. No dispute yet... but I d rather get some input before starting. See a proposed signpost page. 21:46, 2 September 2005 (UTC)

— Edit and revert war with personal insults over adding a Criticism section; the party who wishes to see it added refuses to accept keeping the text on the Talk page until a consensus has been reached on its merits or lack of same. 03:45, 27 August 2005 (UTC)

I d like some experienced editors to comment on the listing of DADiSP as a competitive product to MATLAB. 19:02, 24 August 2005 (UTC)

— should the article make mention of those who claim Chernobyl was the result of sabotage, and if so how

) — dispute over which websites should go in the external links section. 15:20, August 2, 2005 (UTC)

— survey on how technical specifications should be presented in articles about aircraft 09:47, 17 July 2005 (UTC)

— there has been extensive editwarring over numerous items; NPOV eyes needed. July 1, 2005 20:19 (UTC)

This topic is now in Protection. 4 July 2005 21:57 (UTC)

Currently, the related Price-Anderson Act dispute is in Mediation. 18:43, 10 July 2005 (UTC)

Seeking consensus to rename - need rational eyes.

=Unclassified=

, an Area-51-like conspiracy theory about contrails 11:26, 3 September 2005 (UTC)

(signing Sophie Petterka ) did not participate at all in the discussion but fill the discussion page with garbage and personal attacks several time a day. Here is a blanking: [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.phptitle=Talk:Bogdanov_Affair&diff=21836057&oldid=21835477 1], replacing what I wrote with garbage. Here is a legal threat: [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.phptitle=Talk:Bogdanov_Affair&diff=prev&oldid=21835036 2]. Here is a Goldwin-like defaming :[http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.phptitle=Talk%3ABogdanov_Affair&diff=22007166&oldid=22006841 3]. Later in the same editition is an accusation as having hacked the Wikepedia system. The IP has been blocked 24h without any change. 16:46, 28 August 2005 (UTC)

for example), particularly regarding sources and evolving and ongoing events. 18:43, 16 August 2005 (UTC)

: To what extent (if at all) should the introduction discuss specific seasonal systems used in different parts of the world A summary of the two competing viewpoints is given. 02:27, 16 August 2005 (UTC)

. The discussion remains civilized but no conclusion is in sight. 4 July 2005 20:54 (UTC)

— one editor argues that we shouldn t refer to what the subject believes, as this is unencyclopædic. 09:23, 26 July 2005 (UTC)