Talk:Parascience
Add topic | This article was nominated for deletion on 7 August 2022. The result of the discussion was redirect. |
 | This redirect does not require a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Bad redirect
[edit]I believe "parapsychology" is never described as "parascience". "Parascience" is a late neologism proposed by Mahner to label non-science activities that are not classified as pseudo-science. I believe the redirect to parapsychology to be erroneous, since either parapsychology is a science or a pseudoscience. ... said: Rursus (mbork³) 12:45, 9 January 2010 (UTC)
- Fixed. See next complaint! ... said: Rursus (mbork³) 13:11, 9 January 2010 (UTC)
Mess
[edit]OK, so i "fixed" the "Parascience" to "parapsychology" redirect, i.e. introduced other meanings. The so produced disambiguation page have the following faults:
- one entry is a neologism without an article, and unless that neologism have a very wide-spread current usage, it should not have an article per WP:policy,
- only one meaning, study of paranormal phenomena, has an article not covering the term.
- the last meaning: any science prefixed by "para-" is a dictionary entry,
- if the neologism meaning and the study of paranormal phenomena meaning gets their articles, they're encyclopedic entries, not dictionary entries,
- this is a disambig page that provides citations! While not essentially illegal, it is a breach of style — disambigs generally don't look like this!
... said: Rursus (mbork³) 13:11, 9 January 2010 (UTC)
No sources?
[edit]The article has a massive problem: There aren't any substantial source cited. In fact, there is just one source , and it mentions the word just once. "(Mahner (2007, 548) proposed the term “parascience” to cover non-scientific practices that are not pseudoscientific.)" That's it. So nearly every word in the article is unsourced. Worse, there have been additions of severe POV such as and rewriting by an User in February. I recommend to check the whole article and to write it from scratch, as there is almost nothing there currently and what is there is unsourced and might be POV. Andol (talk) 23:41, 29 May 2021 (UTC)
- Lots of high-quality sources available:
- https://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=en&as_sdt=0%2C10&q=parascience&btnG=
- https://www.newspapers.com/newspage/101431351/ Quote: "We now live in a world where the lines of science and parascience are converging."
- The article just needs expanding by an interested editor. 5Q5|✉ 11:59, 25 May 2022 (UTC)