User talk:Logical Gentleman

Logical Gentleman,

For a complete picture of the why and how the Exploratorium came about, I believe that the history of its creator is relevant. Frank's history had a huge influence on the philosophies he brought to his unique creation. I know this as I worked with him for the last 15 years of his life (Still miss him tremendously...) This text amplifies and expands on the already fine text on his page (which, I shockingly had nothing to do with, but really like!)

I would like to also discuss the other box you added to the page. While the text was indeed supplied by the Exploratorium, and was indeed less than neutral (since corrected), I hardly believe that it qualifies as "advertisement". This is all information about the Exploratorium and its programs. It is completely factual and is a far far better description that what was on Wikipedia previously. I'd love to hear why you feel it's advertising. I do value your opinion and I'm willing to do modifications, so any help you may be able to offer would be appreciated. Drop by the Exploratorium if you are local, and we can talk!

Ron Hipschman

Ron Hipschman,

I'm not a local, although I have visited the museum several times and think it's a great place. You have convinced me that Frank's history is relevant to the article, but I still believe the article is biased. I don't think it is blatant advertising, but there are some iffy parts. Take this paragraph, for example:

"The Exploratorium's museum floor is the public face of the Exploratorium, a laboratory for the research and development of innovations in exhibits for exploring science, art, and human perception. Be it mouse stem cells beating like heart cells or worms glowing green with the implanted phosphorescence of a jellyfish gene, or having your head encased in a giant bubble -- the first response to any exhibit, is often the word WOW! You can experience many exhibits that have been developed specifically for the online audience on the Exploratorium's website." I feel the rest of the article is similarly flawed, if not to that extreme. Logical Gentleman (talk) 18:58, 29 July 2009 (UTC)

Logical Gentleman,

I agree with your assessment of the paragraph you mention above and have fixed it. Any others? It's always good to have outside eyes. Without any other egregious issues, I'd like to remove the spam-box at the head of the article.

Ronhip (talk) 08:24, 30 July 2009 (UTC) Ron

Ron Hipschman,

Thank you for the edit. I still feel that there are parts that contain weasel words, though. For instance, in the Education section, it is stated that the Exploratorium is "a leader in science education reform.", or in the Early History section, "Exploratorium made it possible for people to believe they can understand the world around them." While these might be true, they're very hard to back up with facts. Other words are used like "the near 100,000 square feet of exhibit space overflows with over 400 Exploratorium-made exhibits", "ingeniously devised science curriculum", or "noted". While these might make the article more interesting, they don't do so in a neutral way. The article doesn't say why the science curriculum is ingeniously devised, or who called it such. Who called it such would be instantly verifiable and therefor encyclopedic content, not an opinion. Perhaps changing the advertisement tag to a weasel word tag or a non-neutrality tag would be more accurate. Again, I thank you for your time. Logical Gentleman (talk) 20:31, 30 July 2009 (UTC)

WP:DTTR
Read the above please, various IPs, probably the same person have been at this all day, hence the only warning. Thanks.Jezhotwells (talk) 19:43, 21 August 2009 (UTC)

Rollback
I've added the rollback flag for you. Please review WP:ROLLBACK in full, and remember that it is only for cases of blatant vandalism. Other instances are better handled via undoing the edit. Any problems please feel free to ask. Pedro : Chat  22:08, 3 September 2009 (UTC)

AfD nomination of MechScape
An editor has nominated one or more articles which you have created or worked on, for deletion. The nominated article is MechScape. We appreciate your contributions, but the nominator doesn't believe that the article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in his/her nomination (see also Notability and "What Wikipedia is not").

Your opinions on whether the article meets inclusion criteria and what should be done with the article are welcome; please participate in the discussion(s) by adding your comments to Articles for deletion/MechScape (2nd nomination). Please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes ( ~ ).

You may also edit the article during the discussion to improve it but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion debate.

Please note: This is an automatic notification by a bot. I have nothing to do with this article or the deletion nomination, and can't do anything about it. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 01:14, 31 October 2009 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 14:12, 24 November 2015 (UTC)