SciForums Knowledge Base

how about making this a sticky?

im going to start work on organizing all the economics threads tonight.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

I'm willing to go through the threads on Science and Society.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

rebel

I don't contribute anything of worth to this board according to James R

and in light of the latest crap moderation

I have contributed to this knowledge base thus:

I have deleted every first post of every one of 119/120 of my threads.

(despite the power to 'delete post' being removed, I merely edited all the text out)

Who knows this may be the start of a trend, except I did not start it :bugeye:

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Thread has been stuck!

Thanks for engagement!

 

Good idea.
Glad to be a part of the team.

 

ToR.

 

And, with the Religion subforum, I've restored many of them. The ones that looked interesting anyway.

It's interesting that you pretend to be affronted about the moderation yet have not qualms about deleting the OP of threads that others have spent what amounts to hours of writing and participation just because you want to throw a temper tantrum.

Not only do you "protest" what you perceive as "crap moderation," but you slap your fellow members in the face with your childish actions. Not only are your posts probably not worthy of inclusion in the SciForums Knowledge Base, but your worthiness among your peers is now questionable. Congratulations.

 

Anyway, getting back on topic, I'll start looking through Religion and History to see what can be revealed for the Knowledge Base.

 

this thread isnt your soapbox.

 

Hi all!

Just a couple notes from me.

There is a technique how to use and make articles in Knowledge base. This will help that there is no deviation in articles’ look.
Once when you found threads and refined posts from them, you could make articles by following pattern.


* All text should be written in Verdana font.


* Main title (derived from one or more compiled threads) should be Bold, Size 4

Title


* All subtitles of different parts of the article should be Bold, Size 3

Subtitle


* When you emphasize something in the article (for example keywords, lists, etc.) you should Bold it. Size stays the same.

Emphasis


* Articles will be in form of threads, so you could split them in posts.

If you’re doing a page break in one post, do it with ‘minus’.

Example of Page break: -----------------------------------------------


* Page break should be placed at the bottom of the page and the foot notes should be placed below.

Also, foot notes are Size 1.

Example: ------------------------------------------

Footnotes goes under



* When you’re referring to the certain foot note in the text, be sure to use ‘sup’ tags, with number of foot note in bracket, red colored.

Example: word [sup][14][/sup]



* In the foot note you should put number in bracket, colored in red, Size 1

Example: [sup][14][/sup] - meaning of word, link to the source, thread, etc.



I hope I didn't perplex this too much.

Cheers!

 

What's the difference then between the knowledge base and the encyclopedia?

 

Knowledge Base will be separate forum category. A place for articles made by editors from compiled scientific threads and posts from all forums.

KB will be also a base for future SciForums E-book or magazine.

Here is more in my first post.

http://sciforums.com/showpost.php?p=1303183&postcount=1

 

Still waiting for editors. I hope there are members who are interested in making of Knowledge Base.

 

i created a thread in the knowledge base subforom "does it qualfy"
maybe we can put all the threads and posts there for the editors to weed through.
http://sciforums.com/showthread.php?t=63911

 

Well, yes that's the main idea. To go through past and present threads and extract content from them.
From extracted and modified content, we will make articles in Knowledge Base Articles forum.

It will require time, but if we have more editors working on KB, I think that would be much easier.
Some editors could be engaged on finding threads, others on modifying and/or making final article threads.
It's not job for just one member.

Editors will get through threads that cover mentioned subject.
They will eliminate off topic content and extract only useful material.

Editors could 'copy-paste' content from threads to articles, with slight modification to get meaningful content in articles.
It's nonsense just to paste someone's thought, after other member's opinion.
There should be slight modification as I said.

Also, editors will have freedom to make article on their own, e.a. to modify content completely and use it only as a guidelines.

There should be 'pros' and 'cons' in articles. Also, some 'controversies' could be added as a footnotes and not neccessary be included in article.

All source threads should be listed in a Reference section in KB articles as links.
All members which contributed to the threads will be listed as Reference and editors who made KB article as well.


This is just an example where editors could start looking:

• There are many threads from Earth Science forum about Global Warming could be used for an article "GW - Hoax ot Truth", for example.
  
• Controversial "HIV-AIDS" threads could be used also.
  
• "Proof that BlackHoles cant exist" thread form Physics & Math forum.

• All other threads that contain interesting discussion, could be used for making KB articles.

In addition, members could make their own unique articles in Knowledge Base if they want.

But, first let's see who is interested to be editor and how many members will be engaged in this.

 

Plazma,

I know you said early on that you wanted to exclude the Religion and Pseudoscience subforums, but I thought I'd present a couple of interesting articles that you might want to look over.

Religion

What is a God?
http://www.sciforums.com/showthread.php?t=2821

Omniscience vs. Free Will: a Paradox
http://www.sciforums.com/showthread.php?t=2476

Definitions: Atheism and Agnosticism
http://www.sciforums.com/showthread.php?t=26679

Scientific Approach to the Jesus Question
http://www.sciforums.com/showthread.php?t=55229

Hindu Deities and Their Meanings
http://www.sciforums.com/showthread.php?t=58358

Why Do People Believe In God? -Results
http://www.sciforums.com/showthread.php?t=25051

The Scientific Study of Religion
http://www.sciforums.com/showthread.php?t=55108

Souls?
http://www.sciforums.com/showthread.php?t=48365

And these next thread may not have a place in the Knowledge Base, but it's significant nonetheless, marking important thoughts in the Religion forum.

With Heavy Heart, I say this to Atheists and Christians
http://www.sciforums.com/showthread.php?t=40413

Pseudoscience

Proof for ETI Parts 1 & 2
http://www.sciforums.com/showthread.php?t=33692
http://www.sciforums.com/showthread.php?t=34364

These threads were started by a currently banned user (I never fully understood why he was banned... I think he taunted Porfiry), and their OP's represent a distinctly pseudoscientific position, but the responses (minus any ad hominem remarks) show how inquiry and critical thought can be applied from the skeptical point of view to effectively answer the pseudoscientific. Again, it may not have a place in the Knowledge Base, but its definitely an example of how some quality and knowledge can be found in even the Pseudoscience category.

 

Well, actually we have excellent material here.
Sure, these threads could be used for Knowledge Base.

We will then include all forums in our thread search, if you agree. There is a lot of good content in forums and archives.

 

I started a thread about this Knowledge Base thing in Site Feedback asking what the new forums were all about. But then I saw this. Haha.

This seems like a really fun thing to participate in. I think I'm game.

Perhaps we could utilize the wiki for this project? We could start an article about the specific topic of whatever thread we find, and basically compile the article to be published within the wiki. This has the benefit of enabling all members to contribute quickly and easily.

Can we make new namespaces? If we can, perhaps we should make a Knowledge Base namespace which can be used specifically for this project. We'd have articles such as "Knowledge Base:Evolution and creationism", for example, in the same way you have articles like "Wikipedia:Tutorial" on Wikipedia.