Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Maths, science, and technology
The following discussions are requested to have community-wide attention: You can sign up to receive a user talk page invitation to participate in discussions of interest to you, see Wikipedia:Feedback request service
Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard
How reliable is the highly referenced, highly discussed WION?
- Option 1: Generally Reliable
- Option 2: Additional Considerations Needed
- Option 3: Generally Unreliable
- Option 4: Must be Deprecated
NotJamestack (talk) 02:07, 24 September 2025 (UTC)
Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Weather
Should WikiProject Weather encourage the use of infobox collages for weather with standalone articles?
Brief background: Infobox images are an often-debated topic for weather articles, sometimes leading to edit wars. In fact, tropical cyclones has an extremely detailed ordering of what image should take precedent (WP:WPTC/IMG), due to how many edit wars have occurred. Very few weather articles currently contain infobox collages; four examples include 2020 California wildfires, Joplin tornado, Tornadoes of 2024, and the very recent July 2025 Central Texas floods. I am able to locate less than 20 weather articles with infobox collages. Some of the most notable weather disasters only display a single image in their infobox including these five examples: Hurricane Katrina, Hurricane Harvey, Hurricane Maria, Tornadoes of 2025 and Hurricane Helene (along with Effects in North Carolina subpage). According to WP:COLLAGETIPS, "
The great benefit of collages is that they allow an article to present multiple visuals for the topic. This makes them particularly useful for leads of broad subjects such as many cities, where using a single image could never be representative enough to suffice by itself."Just in September 2025, Effects of Hurricane Helene in North Carolina and Hurricane Maria have both had infobox image debates and edit wars. To reduce edit wars, should infobox collages be more widely encouraged for all weather articles, should they be discouraged, or should be encouraged for certain types and discouraged for certain types? The Weather Event Writer (Talk Page) 22:13, 14 September 2025 (UTC)
Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard
In relation to flying saucers (sometimes also called "UFOs", "UAPs", "USOs", etc.) are online-only (versus print) articles by Popular Mechanics:
- Option 1: Generally reliable for factual reporting.
- Option 2: Unclear or additional considerations apply.
- Option 3: Generally unreliable for factual reporting.
- Option 4: Publishes false or fabricated information, and should be deprecated.
Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard
Is the Journal of Scientific Exploration:
- Option 1: Generally reliable for factual reporting.
- Option 2: Unclear or additional considerations apply.
- Option 3: Generally unreliable for factual reporting.
- Option 4: Publishes false or fabricated information, and should be deprecated.