Talk:Big science: Difference between revisions
Juliancolton (talk | contribs) replace banner, Replaced: {{BT list coverage| → {{Outline of knowledge coverage| using AWB |
→possible refs: fixed ref to Galison & Hevly 1992; it's cited wrong on the main page, but I don't at this moment have time to learn how to fix it |
||
| Line 17: | Line 17: | ||
''Reflections on Big Science'', Alvin M. Weinberg, 1969, MIT Press, ISBN-10:0-262-73018-9 [http://mitpress.mit.edu/catalog/item/default.asp?ttype=2&tid=9695] --[[User:Mu301|mikeu]] <sup>[[User talk:Mu301|talk]]</sup> 12:44, 5 January 2009 (UTC) |
''Reflections on Big Science'', Alvin M. Weinberg, 1969, MIT Press, ISBN-10:0-262-73018-9 [http://mitpress.mit.edu/catalog/item/default.asp?ttype=2&tid=9695] --[[User:Mu301|mikeu]] <sup>[[User talk:Mu301|talk]]</sup> 12:44, 5 January 2009 (UTC) |
||
''Big Science: The Growth of Large Scale Research'', Peter Galison, Stanford University Press (April 1992), ISBN-10: 0804723354 --[[User:Mu301|mikeu]] <sup>[[User talk:Mu301|talk]]</sup> 12:51, 5 January 2009 (UTC) |
''Big Science: The Growth of Large Scale Research'', Peter Galison and Bruce Hevly, eds., Stanford University Press (April 1992), ISBN-10: 0804723354 --[[User:Mu301|mikeu]] <sup>[[User talk:Mu301|talk]]</sup> 12:51, 5 January 2009 (UTC) |
||
Revision as of 20:35, 10 May 2012
 | This article was nominated for deletion on 3 January 2009. The result of the discussion was keep. |
Template:Outline of knowledge coverage
 | History of Science Start‑class Top‑importance | |||||||||
| ||||||||||
Take this out?
In the article, it is stated that "World War I was the first war in which science played a major role in warfare and armaments." This is obviously untrue and kind of silly. If it were up to me, I'd change it. What do you think? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.138.20.51 (talk) 07:11, 19 March 2008 (UTC)
- Whoever wrote that has obviously not played any strategy games. I'll fix it, but the real problem is that this article doesn't actively cite its sources, so silly statements like that easily occur. Merzul (talk) 14:49, 20 May 2008 (UTC)
I would point out that the scientific method has only been around in its modern form for a few hundered years. So perhaps it would be better to say something like "WWI was the first war to take full, government sponsored advantage of big science." keep in mind that this article is about big science, not about og the caveman realizing that fire hurts.Playwrite (talk) 07:14, 24 June 2008 (UTC)
possible refs
"''Big science'' is a term coined by Alvin Weinberg in the 1960's when he was the director of the Oak Ridge National Laboratory in Tennessee. Big science involves the collaboration of large numbers of scientists, Government officials, university faculty members and administrators and industrial contractors, and large sums of money, to produce new instruments to advance our understanding of nature. Examples of big science include the space sciences, particle accelerators, oceanographic vessels, research in fusion energy and the project to map the human genome. It is apparent that, the more deeply we look into nature, the more big science we are going to need." Big Science in the Sky, Leon M. Lederman, New York Times, April 8, 1990.
Reflections on Big Science, Alvin M. Weinberg, 1969, MIT Press, ISBN-10:0-262-73018-9 [1] --mikeu talk 12:44, 5 January 2009 (UTC)
Big Science: The Growth of Large Scale Research, Peter Galison and Bruce Hevly, eds., Stanford University Press (April 1992), ISBN-10: 0804723354 --mikeu talk 12:51, 5 January 2009 (UTC)