Talk:Andrew Prentice

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
WikiProject Biography / Science and Academia (Rated Stub-class)
WikiProject icon 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.
Stub-Class article Stub  This article has been rated as Stub-Class on the project's quality scale.
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by the science and academia work group.
 
WikiProject Australia (Rated Start-class, Low-importance)
WikiProject icon Andrew Prentice is within the scope of WikiProject Australia, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of Australia and Australia-related topics. If you would like to participate, visit the project page.
Start-Class article Start  This article has been rated as Start-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Low  This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
 
Note icon
Need help improving this article? Ask a LibrarianWhat's this? at the National Library of Australia.
Note icon
The Wikimedia Australia chapter can be contacted via email to help@wikimedia.org.au for other than editorial assistance.

Untitled[edit]

he is the most awesome lecturer i ever had {for MAT 1841} —Preceding unsigned comment added by 118.138.164.133 (talk) 10:56, 6 October 2010 (UTC)

Predictions a posteriori[edit]

I added a small paraghraph about the so-called predictions of Prentice.

Refer also to J.Monaghan, 1995, http://adsabs.harvard.edu/full/1995EM&P...71...73M - luxorion

Any such material needs to be carefully written in view of WP:BLP. The second of the added paragraphs is particularly problematic. Sminthopsis84 (talk) 17:03, 17 February 2016 (UTC)

You listed a selected choices of predictions but have ignored ALL failed predictions... Is it a so that works the ""objectivity" of wikipedia ?.... I doubt.

It is a pity that the comments of a scientist, even duly referenced, are refused by "Wikipedia" but that those of amateurs are validated. Where is the so-called "objectivity" ? - luxorion