Actions

Talk

Pseudoscience::Cymatics

::concepts

Hyacinth::article    Sound::cymatics    August::special    Added::class    Small::sound    Which::oscarg

Pseudoscience Wikipedia claims to be neutral, but it isn't and here is an excellent example.

The bottom of this page suggests several relevant links, one of which is "Pseudoscience." (Or maybe that is an example of subtle cyber vandalism?)

In any event, that is a pretty harsh editorial decision. There are more than a few "science" articles on Wikipedia for which I would like to provide that link, but will refrain from doing so.

Of course, any text will have a non-neutral point of view or it wouldn't be worth reading! So I don't really fault Wikipedia for that- only for dishonestly claiming that neutrality is possible.

117.14.96.231 (talk) 08:01, 2 June 2012 (UTC)

I assume you mean it is not neutral because it is an internal link. Remember Wikipedia is "the free encyclopedia that almost anyone can edit." Hyacinth (talk) 06:04, 3 June 2012 (UTC)

Talk:Cymatics sections
Intro  Sound Not A Wave  Image  Context?  Science?  Standing waves   Slashdot link   New Discoveries in Cymatics  Medical Aspects  Article needs revision   Pseudoscience    visible sound co vibration   

Pseudoscience
PREVIOUS: IntroNEXT: Sound Not A Wave
<<>>