Talk:Popular Science

Untitled

"Average subscriber household income of over $100,000.".. That's amazing! I read PCGamer, so I'm guessing the average income is about 25,000. Oh wait, HOUSEHOLD income, including husbands, wives and anyone else living there. Scratch that, it's not that impressive anymore, just medium to lower-upper class ^_^ JayKeaton 01:10, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, but there's a good chance that the average man who reads PopSci doesn't have a wife or kids... :) -- Kicking222 20:57, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

"This article is about the magazine and film short series. For the general concept of interpreting science for a broad audience, see popular science.".. i dont see any thing in this artical about films. was that portion removed or is this a typo? Usnn 15:51, 10 June 2007 (UTC)

I'm shocked that there are no cites for this article. Bearian (talk) 01:34, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

Google Books archive of Popular Science

I just stumbled across the Popular Science archive in Google Books a few days ago. The pages of each issue can be direct-linked, and so now Wikipedians have a way to add just an insanely huge amount of verifiable cites in articles. For example:

Study of Northern Lights Leads to Invention of New Compass, Popular Science, May 1932, p40, Scanned by Google Books: http://books.google.com/books?id=1ScDAAAAMBAJ&pg=PA39

I've started a category to go along with it for Google Books, and I should probably make a second category for Popular Science itself:

The wealth and breadth of material covered by Popular Science over the years is so massive that I think it may turn out to be a major contributor to Wikipedia articles.

DMahalko (talk) 07:46, 7 February 2009 (UTC)

Citable?

Hi, I got the March 2009 issue and I found some facts and estimations for various things, some of which have articles on this site. Does this magazine count as a source that can be cited or is it best not to? Thank you. 68.51.41.46 (talk) 07:37, 2 March 2009 (UTC)

Gerson.js Chicareli.js Demo.js (talk) 23:52, 27 August 2020 (UTC)

Wikisource Popular Science Project

Hi guys,

I just wanted to let you guys know that Wikisource has a project for adding and proofreading the Popular Science issues that have fallen into the public domain. That project can be found here. There is a lot of work to be done, but once we get the issues ready, it would be great to add a link from Wikipedia to the project. I just thought I would mention it here on this discussion page. --Mattwj2002 (talk) 09:50, 2 May 2009 (UTC)

From 1872-1915 it was a first-rate scientific journal for the educated public. After that, not so much. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2600:1700:6AE5:2510:0:0:0:24 (talk) 23:23, 15 August 2023 (UTC)

Isn't There a Popular Science Book?

I have next to me as of this writing date a book that Popular Science made. It is called "Popular Science FYI." Can someone confirm this book? AnimalCrossingCool (talk) 05:29, 29 September 2011 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Popular Science. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20080929011557/http://www.gizmodo.com.au:80/2008/09/popular_science_launches_in_australia.html to http://www.gizmodo.com.au/2008/09/popular_science_launches_in_australia.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 06:23, 8 January 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Popular Science. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://archive.is/20120918032329/http://www.sciencechannel.com/popsci to http://www.sciencechannel.com/popsci
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20081122122810/http://www.nypost.com/seven/01252007/business/time_warner_sells_mags_under_300m_business_keith_j__kelly.htm to http://www.nypost.com/seven/01252007/business/time_warner_sells_mags_under_300m_business_keith_j__kelly.htm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 19:09, 15 December 2017 (UTC)

quarterly vs monthly and early issues

according to the german version of this article, Popular Science is a monthly magazin, not quarterly.

and by the way: hier are early issues of the mag. https://archive.org/stream/popularsciencemo01newy#page/n7/mode/2up -- 62.216.207.245 (talk) 20:48, 30 June 2018 (UTC)

Should this be split?

Popular Science is a trademarked brand, the name of the magazine after it was changed from Popular Science Monthly, a website with the now digital-only version of the publication, a podcast, and various other variants of media branded under the name. This article seems to be an overview of the history of the uses of the brand rather than a specific article on each of these subjects. There have been many changes of owners, publishers, the name itself, merging into other magazines, and so on. It seems it may be good to break this up into separate articles for each aspect. As it currently stands, it is still a bit vague as far as the changes of name, publishers, brand ownership, and so on. I'd suggest having a main brand article and then having separate articles on the physical version of the works (Popular Science Monthly and Popular Science) and current online publication. These could potentially be transcluded into the main overview of the brand name. This would likely help with consolidating the information regarding each form and time period. AHIOH ^[T]/_[C] 02:56, 4 August 2024 (UTC)