Talk:List of atheists in science and technology

Adding individuals to this category may be in violation of several WP rules and guidelines
Statements and claims presented as a fact must be backed by balanced, certified and strong unequivocal research and scholarship with the help of multiple sources. Loose claims here and there are just opinions and does not amount to an fair and balanced view. Varying authors can be be used as a source for presenting an opinion for such and such, but it is still not to be deemed authoritative and conclusive.


 * PLEASE OBSERVE THE FOLLOWING


 * WP:CAT Categories regarding religious beliefs of a living person should not be used unless the subject has publicly self-identified with the belief in question (see WP:BLPCAT), either through direct speech or through action. For a dead person, there must be a verified consensus of reliable published sources that the description is appropriate.


 * WP:CHERRY fact picking. Instead of finding a balanced set of information about the subject,  a coatrack goes out of its way to find facts that support a particular bias. An appropriate response to a coatrack article is to  be bold and trim off excessive biased content


 * WP:EXCEPTIONAL - Exceptional claims require exceptional sources


 * WP:SCICON The statement that all or most scientists, scholars, or ministers hold a certain view requires a reliable source. Without it, opinions should be identified as those of particular, named sources. Editors should avoid original research especially with regard to making blanket statements based on novel syntheses of disparate material.


 * WP:FRINGE -A theory that is not broadly supported by scholarship in its field must not be given undue weight in an article


 * WP:YESPOV Ensure that the reporting of different views on a subject adequately reflects the relative levels of support for those views, and that it does not give a false impression of parity, or give undue weight to a particular view.


 * WP:WEIGHT -Neutrality requires that each article or other page in the mainspace fairly represents all significant viewpoints that have been published by reliable sources, in proportion to the prominence of each viewpoint in the published, reliable sources.


 * WP:YESPOV -Avoid stating opinions as facts


 * WP:NOR -Any analysis or interpretation of the quoted material, however, should rely on a secondary source (See: WP:No original research)


 * PS


 * These may be furthermore of use


 * WP:NOTOPINION -Opinion pieces, although some topics, particularly those concerning current affairs and politics, may stir passions and tempt people to "climb soapboxes".
 * WP:NOTRELIABLE - Questionable sources are those that have a poor reputation for checking the facts, lack meaningful editorial oversight, or have an apparent conflict of interest.[8] Such sources include websites and publications expressing views that are widely considered by other sources to be extremist or promotional
 * WP:ASSERT When a statement is a fact (a piece of information about which there is no serious dispute) it should be asserted without prefixing it with "(Source) says that ...", and when a statement is an opinion (a matter which is subject to dispute) it should be attributed to the source that offered the opinion using inline-text attribution.
 * WP:SYN :Synthesis of published material that advances a position. Do not combine material from multiple sources to reach or imply a conclusion not explicitly stated by any of the sources.


 * Thank you and hope to make Wikipedia a better place!



A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion: Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 18:24, 26 February 2023 (UTC)
 * Alan Turing Aged 16 (cropped).jpg

The super micro chip travels the dna system
Microsoft micro chip made by sunderlands wisest scientist in the 1990ts ive got it in me he studied how the device what was reverse technoligedied to be able to read your thoughts but it cant controal them though it can corrupt them or bring out the best he is about 74 to 75 years old now studied at the sunderland polytechnick all through the 90ts and was forced in to putting this device in me after he compleated the way our dna worked 185.69.145.80 (talk) 21:41, 17 April 2023 (UTC)

"List of atheists, agnostics and other nontheists (science and technology)" listed at Redirects for discussion
The redirect [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=List_of_atheists,_agnostics_and_other_nontheists_(science_and_technology)&redirect=no List of atheists, agnostics and other nontheists (science and technology)] has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at  until a consensus is reached. Steel1943 (talk) 20:57, 5 February 2024 (UTC)

"whose atheism is relevant to their notable activities or public life"
What does this mean? Many entries in this list seem to fail this criterion. 50.221.225.231 (talk) 22:27, 17 July 2024 (UTC)