This article is within the scope of WikiProject Years, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Years on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.YearsWikipedia:WikiProject YearsTemplate:WikiProject YearsYears articles
This article is part of the History of Science WikiProject, an attempt to improve and organize the history of science content on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion. You can also help with the History of Science Collaboration of the Month.History of ScienceWikipedia:WikiProject History of ScienceTemplate:WikiProject History of Sciencehistory of science articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Lists, an attempt to structure and organize all list pages on Wikipedia. If you wish to help, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.ListsWikipedia:WikiProject ListsTemplate:WikiProject ListsList articles
This article, and 1500 in science, were prod'ed. I object to the deletion, until I see some persuasive arguments that these pages are "unencyclopedic." Maybe a general discussion on the contents of all <YEAR> in science articles is needed? Awolf002 19:41, 6 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Too right! I can't remember why I created the article, but I must have spotted some kind of gap in the sequence. The year articles in science are, I think, as well-established as those for the arts. Deb 20:34, 6 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
