Talk:Gilles-Éric Séralini: Difference between revisions

Browse history interactively

← Previous edit Next edit →

Content deleted Content added

VisualWikitext

Inline

Revision as of 04:48, 13 December 2015

Biography: Science and Academia Start‑class

	Biography portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography articles
Start	This article has been rated as Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
	This article is supported by the science and academia work group.
	An editor has requested that an image or photograph be added to this article.

Template:WikiProject Genetics

Brother

Why is there this sentence about his brothers illness? How is this even marginal relevant to the person bio? prokaryotes (talk) 12:48, 1 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

read the source. it was important on a few levels. Jytdog (talk) 14:08, 1 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, republished under peer-review

To say the article 'was not peer-reviewed' when republished in the journal Environmental Sciences Europe, is an absurdity, and shows the writer does not understand science. Those scientists at the Environmental Sciences Europe, are independent peer-reviewers of the peer-reviewed research. They checked it, it was properly conducted. That's peer-review.

@@ Line 7: / Line 7: @@
 Why is there this sentence about his brothers illness? How is this even marginal relevant to the person bio? [[User:Prokaryotes|prokaryotes]] ([[User talk:Prokaryotes|talk]]) 12:48, 1 September 2015 (UTC)
 :read the source. it was important on a few levels. [[User:Jytdog|Jytdog]] ([[User talk:Jytdog|talk]]) 14:08, 1 September 2015 (UTC)
+== Yes, republished under peer-review ==
+To say the article 'was not peer-reviewed' when republished in the journal Environmental Sciences Europe, is an absurdity, and shows the writer does not understand science. Those scientists at the Environmental Sciences Europe, are independent peer-reviewers of the peer-reviewed research. They checked it, it was properly conducted. That's peer-review.