Talk:Scientific writing/Archive 1

Issues

For experimenting, please use the sandbox. It would be appreciated if you would delete your own article when done. Thank you. --Nagle 07:15, 28 March 2006 (UTC)

Wikipedia is intended as a verifiable source with references to other works, rather then for one's own papers. In particular, "how-to" material is being moved out of Wikipedia. See WP:V, WP:OR, and How-to for Wikipedia policy on this. Your own new work can be published in Wikisource or Wikibooks if desired. --Nagle 08:07, 28 March 2006 (UTC)

This is starting to look like it should be transwikied to Wikibooks, I think. --Karnesky 22:25, 20 October 2006 (UTC)

Ahistorical

While the mostly formal rules outlined in this article might be quite helpful for students, a broader approach on this topic woud be appropriate. Thinking about the "plain style" emphasized by Francis Bacon and the Royal Society could be a starting point. --Armin B. Wagner

Remark about this article: Any article about scientific writing should begin with a discussion of what it is supposed to do. The thing I notice here right away is the know-it-all attitude of the author. The guidelines given are not clearly organized. Already in 'Tense and Mood' the presentation is confused and some of the statements are highly debatable. How could anybody turn to this article for advice? As someone who deals a lot with scientific writing, I highly recommend, instead of Wiki, all the books on scientific writing by a real expert in the matter: Robert A. Day.83.21.132.90 19:32, 12 July 2007 (UTC) I agree; this article is written poorly. It is not a good source for students and they must be enouraged to go elsewhere. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.49.119.57 (talk) 15:56, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

tense

I really don't like the use of pronouns in any wikipedia article. This deserves it's space in either wikibooks or wikiversity, but this version needs to be altered to be plain information. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 142.25.81.184 (talk) 21:53, 30 January 2009 (UTC)

Unfounded

This page recommends most of the language constructs we were taught not to use when writing scientific papers. Moreover, the recommendations come without references. To avoid misguiding students, non native researchers and inexperienced reviewers, I would delete this page, or at least put a big warning at the top of the page.

~~F. De Mey~~ —Preceding unsigned comment added by 146.175.108.44 (talk) 09:34, 28 January 2010 (UTC)