Recently I have been reflecting on the role of Scientific articles and their role to communicate findings to colleagues and society. My reflection is taking me to the need to create a kind of Wikipedia that has Editors per topics (at different levels, all linked). The scientists would then do an experiment to prove, disprove, test and complement the scientific "statements" (body of knowledge). The paper submission should have the goal to confirm and increase trust of the existing text at the Scientific Wikipedia, or suggest specific changes. Then the editors would choose to write something like: "However, recent studies are showing evidences of ..., and further studies are needed, etc...". This would also identify gaps in knowledge.
That is a great idea. I was also thinking of starting something like a Snopes for Science. I think they are currently several projects which are underway on verifying published data - reproducibility studies. However, the challenge in such studies is the lack of impetus to fund such projects.
However, a Snopes for Science will be easier to implement because it will only take using published literature to debunk myths and common beliefs. If you would like to take this project further, count me in!
Dear Edmund can you provide some links so I can better follow the idea on "Snopes for Science"? Thanks.
- Badges
- Science topic
- Similar topics
- Linguistics
- Composition Studies
- Writing